>From your background description on the projects, BND seems a good choice. I don't really have a strong preference.
cheers, Andy On 18 January 2013 05:42, M. P. <free...@abv.bg> wrote: > I'm asking because SpringSource Bundlor has been discontinued. The current > stuff has been moved to Virgo and will not be a separate package as far as > I understand. > http://www.springsource.org/bundlor > On the other hand BND is not going away any time soon, plus I think it has > a bigger community. I have some experience with BND and I know it can > generate "uses" directives which are not easy to add manually. > Of course it is up to you. AspectJ's bundles are simple enough so it > doesn't really matter which tool is used. > I'd like to ask you to make this decision then I'll play with the build > for a while and will get back to you with either a patch or questions :) > > Regards > M > > > > Hi, > > My preference for bundlor was only because I knew the team that > wrote it and could hassle them directly with questions :) but really > whatever works is fine. > > There was a nightly build (cruisecontrol driven) running on the > eclipse servers but since we moved from CVS to GIT last year it hasn't been > resurrected - another thing on my todo list ! Right now I tend to do adhoc > dev builds now and again and upload them, in between the full releases (a > 1.7.2 release isn't too far away, it'd be great to get the OSGi manifests > done for that). > > cheers, > > Andy > > > On 15 January 2013 23:34, M. P. > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Great. > > > So as far as I understand you prefer Bundlor over BND? > > > Now that you mention the build process, is there a periodic build > running? > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > > > > > Yep, that is ok with me and ideally what I'd like to do. My > hesitancy about it is just because I am aware that the build process is not > a fun place to work at the moment so it may not be as straightforward as > you imagine... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 15 January 2013 02:59, M. P. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Looks like this is a slight misunderstanding. > > > > > > > I meant to use BND or Bundlor in the build script to > generate the manifest every time. And test the resulting OSGi bundle in a > real OSGi runtime just once (manually, before this is committed). > > > > > > > Is that OK with you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd be ok with a one time manual test to verify > it is basically correct. I previously used bundlor but was not in a > position to verify the output so I never committed it. Ideally I wanted to > integrate bundlor invocation into the build process so that when > occasionally a new package is added or one deleted, the manifest stays in > step. Rather than just run bundlor once and commit those fixed manifests. > However, if a 'one off run' is simplest then I'd be ok to use it for > aspectjrt.jar as the package set for that hardly ever changes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cheers, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 11 January 2013 11:11, M. P. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd assume they have an environment in > which to verify the correctness of what is being created. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do mean an automatic test suite or one-time > manual testing? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Automatic tests would be very nice but they > would require serious machinery such as the OSGi runtime. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And maybe these bundles (aspectrt, weaver, > etc) are simple enough so that it is safe to assume that tools such as BND > and Bundlor generate valid manifests? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The weaver also needs one (and I > suppose it does no harm to get it right for tools and matcher too). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This has long been on the list of > TODOs (see bugs like > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=338034) - I even > prototyped the implementation with bundlor ( > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.springsource.org/bundlor). I created some basic > versions for testing but I don't believe the users got back to me about > whether what was being generated was correct. Traditionally users just > seemed to go the EBR and collect the versions from there which had had > their manifests regenerated. I'd be happy for someone to take this on and > sort it out properly for AspectJ, I'm more than happy to help them progress > it - I'd assume they have an environment in which to verify the correctness > of what is being created. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The AspectJ build process is a bit > arcane, which can make something you'd think would be easy, rather tricky, > but I'll help a brave soul battle through that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cheers, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10 January 2013 06:51, M. P. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> The aspectjrt.jar does not have a > valid OSGi manifest at the moemnt. It would be nice if it did. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> In order to make it OSGi compliant > the manifest should get a few more headers such as Export-Package. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> I saw that the aspectjrt.jar > manifest is generated from this file > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://git.eclipse.org/c/aspectj/org.aspectj.git/tree/aspectj5rt/aspectj5rt.mf.txt > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Since the packages listed in > Export-Package should have versions adding this header to the manifest > template is problemat because when the version placeholders are replaced > with the real values the format of the manifest may become invalid. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> So how do you feel about > generating the manifest in the build script via > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://ant.apache.org/manual/Tasks/manifest.html? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> aspectj-users mailing list > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > aspectj-users@eclipse.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > aspectj-users mailing list > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > aspectj-users@eclipse.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > aspectj-users mailing list > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > aspectj-users@eclipse.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > aspectj-users mailing list > > > > > > aspectj-users@eclipse.org > > > > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > aspectj-users mailing list > aspectj-users@eclipse.org > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users >
_______________________________________________ aspectj-users mailing list aspectj-users@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
