[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-784?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12641409#action_12641409
]
Rob Walker commented on FELIX-784:
----------------------------------
Main reason for keeping them was for Apps like ours, with users out in the
field with existing config files.
Keeping backwards compatibility means lower rollout effort of new versions, and
doesn't create much extra dev work my side.
> Create "felix" property name as alternatives to old style Oscar property names
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FELIX-784
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-784
> Project: Felix
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: HTTP Service
> Reporter: Rob Walker
> Priority: Trivial
>
> Some of the Http properties still use the old Oscar prefix.
> The following set is proposed for the old and new equivalent names:
> org.ungoverned.osgi.bundle.https.enable ----->
> org.apache.felix.https.enable
> org.ungoverned.osgi.bundle.https.provider ----->
> org.apache.felix.https.provider
> org.ungoverned.osgi.bundle.https.keystore ----->
> org.apache.felix.https.keystore
> org.ungoverned.osgi.bundle.https.password ----->
> org.apache.felix.https.password
> org.ungoverned.osgi.bundle.https.key.password ----->
> org.apache.felix.https.key.password
> org.apache.felix.http.jetty.debug -----> org.apache.felix.http.debug
> Whilst the latter already has a "felix" name, if Felix adds a later
> lightweight/non-jetty it will make for simpler migration to have a non-jetty
> specific property name
> For backwards compatibility it is probably best to create newer "felix"
> alternatives in parallel to the older style name, so either name may be used.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
