> Hi Francesco, > > I don't see why the merges for SYNCOPE-203 need to be reverted as they are > not breaking anything. I would prefer to leave things as they are but not > claim full OSGi support in the 1.1.0 release. > > I guess you are concerned that these issues will hold up the 1.1.0 release and > so I propose the following. Give us until the end of the week to find a > solution for SYNCOPE-337 (and any related problems). If we have not found a > solution by then, then this JIRA can be moved to the next release (1.1.1 if it > can be considered a "bug" based on 1.1.0, otherwise 1.2). > > Does this work? > > Colm.
+1 > > On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Francesco Chicchiriccò > <ilgro...@apache.org > > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > currently we have on trunk (e.g. 1.1.0-SNAPSHOT) a first OSGi support > > for all modules as per SYNCOPE-203. > > > > However, this seems not to be working (see SYNCOPE-337), even if > > changing the build for generating MANIFEST.MF according to the ones > attached there. > > From the other side, this problem appear to be expected since > > SYNCOPE-204 is planned only for 1.2.0. > > > > Basically, I see for 1.1.0 a quite incoherent situation in which OSGi > > is half-supported. > > > > Since we are getting close to releasing stable 1.1.0, my proposal is > > to reopen SYNCOPE-203, revert the provided changes and to move > > SYNCOPE-203, > > SYNCOPE-204 and SYNCOPE-337 to 1.2.0. > > > > We can contextually copy the current trunk to a new 1_1_X branch, move > > trunk version to 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT and re-apply immediately the changes > > from > > SYNCOPE-203 there. > > > > WDYT? > > > > -- > > Francesco Chicchiriccò > > > > ASF Member, Apache Syncope PMC chair, Apache Cocoon PMC Member > > http://people.apache.org/~**ilgrosso/<http://people.apache.org/~ilgros > > so/> > > > > > > > -- > Colm O hEigeartaigh > > Talend Community Coder > http://coders.talend.com
