Archive for January, 2012

A long time ago (ok, only 5.5 years ago), when Apache CXF was fist being spun up, we made a decision to try and separate the “API” and the “implementation” of the various CXF components into separate module. This was a very good idea for the most part. However, we did this prior to really investigating OSGi requirements (OSGi was just beginning to become well known). Thus, we didn’t take into account the OSGi split-package issue. The common pattern we used was to put the interfaces in cxf-api, and the “impl” in the exact same package in cxf-rt-core. In OSGi, that’s a big problem (without using fragments).

A few years ago, when users started really pushing the idea of using CXF in OSGi, we had to come up with a solution. I’ll admit we kind of took the “easy road” at the time. As part of the CXF build, we already were creating an “uber bundle” which contained all of the individual CXF modules squashed together into a single jar. We primarily did that to simplify classpath issues, dependencies, etc… for users (single jar to deal with, single pom dependency, etc…). When looking at options for OSGi, we saw that bundle as an “easy” path to OSGi. By adding OSGi manifest entries, CXF can be brought up in OSGi. Since ALL the packages are in that jar, no split-package issues.

For the most part, that setup has worked “OK”, but it’s really not ideal. CXF has a wide range of functionality, much of it may not be required by every user. The bundle ended up importing a LOT of packages. The current bundle imports about 240 packages. Thus, we had to go through and mark many of the imports “optional”. Over 160 of those imports are marked optional. (and likely some of the others could as well) This type of setup, while it “works”, is really less than ideal. It doesn’t work well with things like the OBR resolvers. It requires extra refreshes to add functionality that may be required by new bundles. It requires a lot of extra dependencies to be loaded upfront to reduce refreshes. Etc…

Over the past few weeks, Christian Schneider and I have been re-evaluating the split-package issue in CXF to try and come up with a better solution. An initial evaluation back in December found 25 packages that were split across jars. I have spent quite a bit of time the last couple weeks looking at each of those 25 split packages to figure out what can be done. We did hit some challenges and I ended up talking quite a bit with Christian about possible solutions, but I’m really happy to say that as of my commits this morning, all 25 are now resolved. All of the CXF individual modules are loadable as individual OSGi bundles. A couple of very simple test cases are working.

What kind of problems did we hit:

  • One of the main issues as mentioned above was an interface in API and then some sort of implementation in rt-core. For the most part, users always looked up the implementation via the bus.getExtension(..) call so the impl is really “private”. In those cases, the impl was moved to a new package in rt-core.
  • Abstract base classes in rt-core – similar to above. We had the interface in api, but an abstract base class in rt-core. There were then subclasses of that base class in the other modules. This really showed that the abstract base classes should have been part of the API, which is exactly what we did. Moved the class to API.
  • Promote some stuff to API – we did have a bunch of utility things in rt-core that was easily promoted to api. Things like our CachedOutputStream, mime attachment support, etc… that were easy to just promote up. They are heavily used in several submodules so it made sense to promote them anyway.
  • Pushed some optional stuff out of API – particular WS-Policy support. We did have some ws-policy related stuff in API that we could not resolve the split-package issue by promoting up. Thus, we pushed down into the cxf-rt-ws-policy. This may have an end user impact as they may need to have the cxf-rt-ws-policy module on their classpath to compile their code. However, they would have needed it on their classpath anyway to run the code so impact should be very minimal. The good thing about this is that this then reduces the imports in cxf-api by not requiring things like neethi for the api module. For JAX-RS users, this is good.

There were other issues caused by promoting stuff into API, but for the most part, they ended up being resolvable by loading an implementation via a bus extension. That seems to have cleaned things up quite a bit.

Anyway, it’s been a very challenging few weeks as we worked through all the split package issues. To be honest, the end result isn’t “ideal”. There is definitely more stuff in API than I’d really like to have there, but we were able to maintain a high degree of compatibility with existing applications. That’s important. Maybe when we do a “3.0″ we can re-look at that, but for now, compatibility is very important. With the split package issue resolved, Christian and I are embarking on a new mission to examine the OSGi manifests of all the individual jars to adjust import version ranges, check for optionals, update the karaf features file, etc… One advantage of the big bundle was we only needed to do that in one place. Now we have many more touch points. However, the end result should definitely be a better experience for end users. I’m very excited about that.