On 19 July 2012 23:05, Timothy Ward <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > All four build fine, and the poms/manifests for three of them are fine. > Unfortunately the manifest for jmx-bundle doesn't use version ranges in most > of its imports: > > Import-Package: javax.management,javax.management.openmbean,org.apache > .aries.util;version="[1.0,2)",org.osgi.framework;version="1.5.0",org. > osgi.jmx;version="1.0.0",org.osgi.jmx.framework;version="1.5.0",org.o > sgi.jmx.service.cm;version="1.3.0",org.osgi.jmx.service.permissionadm > in;version="1.2.0",org.osgi.jmx.service.provisioning;version="1.2.0", > org.osgi.jmx.service.useradmin;version="1.1.0",org.osgi.service.cm;re > solution:=optional;version="1.3.0",org.osgi.service.log;version="[1.3 > ,2)",org.osgi.service.packageadmin;version="[1.2,2)",org.osgi.service > .permissionadmin;resolution:=optional;version="1.2.0",org.osgi.servic > e.provisioning;resolution:=optional;version="1.2.0",org.osgi.service. > startlevel;version="[1.1,2)",org.osgi.service.useradmin;resolution:=o > ptional;version="1.1.0",org.osgi.util.tracker;version="[1.4,2)" > > I think all of these are set in the pom - I'm not sure if the right answer is > to remove all of the versions in the <aries.osgi.import> tag and let the > bundle plugin figure it out, or to put in the right version ranges. The > former is more maintainable (and nicer) but might not give the intended > result. > > I'm sure we all agree this is a showstopper. If I can +1 the three other > bundles and ask for the jmx-bundle to be fixed/respun then great, otherwise > I'm afraid David will have to wait a little longer. Sorry!
Main reason I'd like to see this one out is to get a release of the 'old' JMX. I implemented 'jmx-next' in the sandbox already, but we agreed that it would be good to get a release of what was there before upgrading. So I'm not sure it's needed to fix the old JMX, as it will soon be superceded anyway. But I will look at the jmx-bundle in jmx-next to ensure that it uses version ranges. In any case I'm fine with either option if someone has time to fix this issue in the old JMX... Cheers, David
