Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 15/09/2006 08:16:52: > On Friday 15 September 2006 07:11, BJ Hargrave wrote: > > Besides how much legacy code is there really in the default package? I > > cannot imagine that there is much at all since it is an open ended package > > without any name. > > Agree, and couldn't a bytecode manipulating tool 'inject' a package name > everywhere??
That was my thought too. Or, depending on the code, write a wrapper with a non-default package name and export the wrapper package. We considered supporting the default package in OSGi R4 and the consequences were pretty unpleasant. The worst thing from my perspective was that the default package ends up looking like a mammoth "split" package, with all the usual rough edges. Glyn _______________________________________________ osgi-dev mailing list osgi-dev@bundles.osgi.org http://bundles.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
