Especially when AS7 can be fully functional even without any OSGi
semantics
It depends on what you mean by "fully functional". We have OSGi on the
product sheet and I always have to use many words when I talk about the
states that a bundle goes through and their respective deployment
phases. At the end of the day these are of course just names, but IMHO
we might as well use the standard terminology when it comes to
modularity. The most obvious case is "A module gets INSTALLED", which
for folks who know the standard means "valid metadata - known to the
runtime - not (yet) resolved - no classloader"
Here again my suggested mapping <
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AS7-3585>
STRUCTURE => STRUCTURE
PARSE => PRE_INSTALL
REGISTER => INSTALL
=> POST_INSTALL
DEPENDENCIES => PRE_RESOLVE
CONFIGURE_MODULE => RESOLVE
FIRST_MODULE_USE => POST_RESOLVE
POST_MODULE => PRE_ACTIVATE
INSTALL => ACTIVATE
=> POST_ACTIVATE
CLEANUP => CLEANUP
cheers
--thomas
On 08/15/2012 10:59 AM, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
On Wednesday 15 August 2012 10:35 AM, Thomas Diesler wrote:
> IMHO Phase.POST_MODULE and Phase.INSTALL
> are not so lucky names because they imply meaning that may not be true.
> For suggested improvement see
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AS7-3585
Is there a reason why they should mean/align the same as what OSGi
expects them to mean? Especially when AS7 can be fully functional even
without any OSGi semantics.
-Jaikiran
_______________________________________________
jboss-as7-dev mailing list
jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev
--
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thomas Diesler
JBoss OSGi Lead
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx