What do you mean by "plain jane jar" ? I don't see anything in the spec
specifying how the filter creating should be done, so I suppose the current
code is specific to the felix jar.   Then, it would make more sense to just
return throw a meaninfull exception instead of including some code that has
no purpose at all.

On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 4:34 PM, Richard S. Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>  > So what about the following one:
>  >   * in framework, move the FrameworkUtil class from org.osgi.core to
>  > org.apache.felix.framework
>  >   * in framework, add a META-INF/services/org.osgi.vendor.framework
>  > property file pointing to org.apache.felix
>  >   * in org.osgi.core, add some code to look into the META-INF/services
>  > if the system property is not set (or use a default value for the
>  > System.property)
>  >
>
>  Well, for org.osgi.core, we are trying to distribute the plain jane OSGi
>  jar, so it doesn't make sense to modify it, I don't think.
>
>  -> richard
>
>
>
>  >
>  > On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 3:31 PM, Richard S. Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  >
>  >> Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>  >>  > Currently, there is a problem if you have both org.osgi.core jar and
>  >>  > the framework jar in your classpath because both can not be easily
>  >>  > used together.
>  >>  > For example I'm writing junit tests that use LDAP filters.  The OSGi
>  >>  > standard way to create those is to call:
>  >>  >    osg.osgi.framework.FrameworkUtil.createFilter(...)
>  >>  >
>  >>  > Unfortunately, the org.osgi.core jar defines an implementation which
>  >>  > is not compatible with the felix framework, because it looks for a
>  >>  > class named FrameworkUtil in a package defined by a system property
>  >>  > (org.osgi.vendor.framework).   This class is not defined by the felix
>  >>  > framework. This is usually not a problem in the OSGi container,
>  >>  > because the classpath is correctly set, but when writing junit tests
>  >>  > in maven, it sometimes quite tricky to order the classpath correctly
>  >>  > (I haven't found a way in my case).
>  >>  >
>  >>  > So I', wondering if I could write a patch that would add this class
>  >>  > and that would allow the standard call to work even if the classpath
>  >>  > is not correctly ordered.
>  >>  > Actually, it's just a copy of the org.osgi.framework.FrameworkUtil
>  >>  > class in the org.apache.felix.framework class I suppose.
>  >>  >
>  >>  > Thoughts ?  Would such a patch be accepted ?
>  >>  >
>  >>
>  >>  I am not interested in a patch to add a duplicate class to the code
>  >>  base, especially since I am always trying to eliminate classes to keep
>  >>  the size down. However, perhaps we can try to think if there is another
>  >>  approach. The simple approach is to put FrameworkUtil in a different
>  >>  package and then just use the standard version of the class to look it 
> up.
>  >>
>  >>  But I don't think we are the only framework to implement it this way,
>  >>  i.e., replacing the default impl of FrameworkUtil directly. I think most
>  >>  try to avoid the level of indirection.
>  >>
>  >>  So, I'd prefer a different solution.
>  >>
>  >>  -> richard
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>



-- 
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/

Reply via email to