In discussion below regarding cglib .... was the intent to completely
remove the use of cglib or just make it optional?
From what I can tell it seems that cglib is already optional (perhaps
due to changes after this discussion). But we still use it if available
in Blueprint AbstractServiceReference and the Blueprint Interceptor
logic. If we completely remove it from the Blueprint Interceptor logic
we would always assume ASM. If we completely remove it from
AbstractServiceReference we would always use the JdkProxy and would
likewise need to remove the AbstractServiceReferenceTest which seems to
be cglib specific.
I have some local changes that I can check in to completely remove cglib
if that is really the intent.
Joe
Jeremy Hughes wrote:
On 11 March 2010 15:48, Jeremy Hughes <[email protected]> wrote:
On 11 March 2010 14:59, Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 14:36, Jeremy Hughes <[email protected]> wrote:
<snip/>
Beyong the core JRE and osgi packages, we have:
* cglib : we should get rid of that one
+1 there's a few JIRAs around this but not one to get rid.
<snip/>
We should really get rid of cglib asap. cglib itself uses asm and we
have our own layer on top of asm.
I don't think we should have a mandatory import on
org.osgi.service.cm, so either find a way to make it optional or
exclude it ?
ok
<snip/>
