On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 3:27 AM, Richard S. Hall <he...@ungoverned.org> wrote: > On 2/26/10 7:43 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote: >> >> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Richard S. Hall<he...@ungoverned.org> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 2/26/10 12:40 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> It does not seem to be sufficient to the commons guys as the want an >>>> "official" and expert blessing from the felix community because it >>>> kinda contradicts the earlier statement they had from Peter which said >>>> that importing your exported packages is a best practice in osgi. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Well, they should have talked to us. ;-) >>> >> >> It came up in three separate threads, here and there was consistently >> the same message :( >> > > Sorry for being flippant. > >> http://felix.markmail.org/message/qp33zosdp43e2vnv >> http://felix.markmail.org/message/tczwuc4qfdo3kpey >> http://felix.markmail.org/message/4y6s7eqdsg5nirvg >> http://felix.markmail.org/message/lg7w4qtetfvhncte >> > > I admit, no one said anything to the contrary in these threads. I am not > sure why I didn't respond to the issue at all. Not sure when the FAQ was > created in relation...looks like it was created in April 2008, so perhaps it > was in response to these questions on the list. > >>> Seriously, what more can we say? >>> >> >> We asked for confirmation from you guys because it had come up several >> times and was the opposite of the advice we had been given here. >> > > Clearly, this wasn't the best advice at the time even though we apparently > knew which advice to give as witnessed by the FAQ from around the same time. > The difficulty is that there often is no single answer, so you often end up > with the default "best practice" as opposed to the best practice tailored to > your specific scenario. > > Sorry we weren't onl the ball back then to give the most appropriate > recommendation, but at this point going forward I'd follow the advice of the > FAQ and if it isn't clear or you have questions, let us know and we'll try > to do a better job at steering you in the correct direction this time.
OK thanks Niall > -> richard > > >> Niall >> >> >>> >>> The FAQ has existed for a fairly long time >>> and our story hasn't changed. Are you suggesting that we need to change >>> the >>> FAQ in some way? Or are you saying that you want some official OSGi >>> Alliance >>> statement on this? >>> >>> As it stands, I think the FAQ tries to explain the issues for deciding >>> what >>> you should do fairly well, but we're willing to improve it if it is not >>> clear. >>> >>> -> richard >>> >>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 17:23, Karl Pauls<karlpa...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Guillaume Nodet<gno...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> What is the best practices for libraries wrt to importing their own >>>>>> exported packages. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Well, I still don't know what you want to discuss. We have this in the >>>>> FAQ: >>>>> >>>>> The main time you want to export only, is if your bundle is purely a >>>>> library bundle, then its packages will only be used if they are >>>>> needed. Another case might be if you have tightly coupled bundles >>>>> sharing implementation packages. However, if your bundle will be >>>>> started and especially if the exported packages define service >>>>> interfaces or are referenced from service interfaces, then you will >>>>> generally want to export and import them. >>>>> >>>>> which seems to be good and is what seems to be not followed in the >>>>> below use case - which causes a problem. If commons pool wouldn't >>>>> import what it exports then everything would have been fine no? >>>>> >>>>> Obviously, there is now single answer to this problem but the FAQ >>>>> seems correct to me. I guess I'm still missing the point. >>>>> >>>>> regards, >>>>> >>>>> Karl >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 17:15, Karl Pauls<karlpa...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Guillaume Nodet<gno...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Guys, can we discuss that and come back with a statement we all >>>>>>>> agree >>>>>>>> on ? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Discuss what? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>>>>>> From: Niall Pemberton<niall.pember...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> Date: Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 16:26 >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [all] OSGI - POOL-160 >>>>>>>> To: Commons Developers List<d...@commons.apache.org> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 3:17 PM, Jörg >>>>>>>> Schaible<joerg.schai...@gmx.de> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Guillaime, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Guillaume Nodet wrote at Donnerstag, 25. Februar 2010 15:49: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I just had a lively chat with Peter who kinda agreed that >>>>>>>>>> substitutability issue is mostly important for APIs. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Please have a look at the Felix FAQ entry: >>>>>>>>>> http://felix.apache.org/site/apache-felix-osgi- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> faq.html#ApacheFelixOSGiFAQ-Shouldabundleimportitsownexportedpackages%253F >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I haven't written it, so I can't be blame for that one. >>>>>>>>>> The last paragraph says: >>>>>>>>>> "The main time you want to export only, is if your bundle is >>>>>>>>>> purely a library bundle, then its packages will only be used if >>>>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>>>> are needed." >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> what we are saying is, that none of us is an OSGi expert and before >>>>>>>>> we >>>>>>>>> published the first artifact with such information, we took the >>>>>>>>> advice of >>>>>>>>> the Apache Felix community. If they recommend now something >>>>>>>>> different, we'd >>>>>>>>> like to get some "official" blessing for the changes, simply >>>>>>>>> because >>>>>>>>> we >>>>>>>>> cannot really review it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Niall >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In all cases, the current imports *are* wrong and need to be >>>>>>>>>> fixed, >>>>>>>>>> because the way they are written will fail if there is any >>>>>>>>>> incompatible change ever introduced (whatever the version). And I >>>>>>>>>> don't think we should guarantee that, especially across major >>>>>>>>>> versions. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> What has been released is final. We're not able to change that >>>>>>>>> anymore. All >>>>>>>>> we can do is to change the OSGi information for new releases. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Anyway, the problem is the following. >>>>>>>>>> You install commons-pool 1.5 in the osgi framework. >>>>>>>>>> Then you install commons-pool 1.4 later. >>>>>>>>>> What you end up with is: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ka...@root> osgi:list -l | grep commons-pool >>>>>>>>>> [ 100] [Active ] [ ] [ ] [ 60] >>>>>>>>>> mvn:commons-pool/commons-pool/1.5.4 >>>>>>>>>> [ 124] [Active ] [ ] [ ] [ 60] >>>>>>>>>> mvn:commons-pool/commons-pool/1.4 >>>>>>>>>> ka...@root> packages:exports 100 >>>>>>>>>> Commons Pool (100): org.apache.commons.pool.impl; version=1.5.4 >>>>>>>>>> Commons Pool (100): org.apache.commons.pool; version=1.5.4 >>>>>>>>>> ka...@root> packages:exports 124 >>>>>>>>>> Apache Commons Pool Bundle (124): No active exported packages. >>>>>>>>>> ka...@root> packages:imports 124 >>>>>>>>>> Commons Pool (100): org.apache.commons.pool.impl; version=1.5.4 >>>>>>>>>> Commons Pool (100): org.apache.commons.pool; version=1.5.4 >>>>>>>>>> ka...@root> osgi:start 170 >>>>>>>>>> Error executing command: Unresolved constraint in bundle >>>>>>>>>> org.apache.activemq.activemq-pool [129]: package; >>>>>>>>>> (&(package=org.apache.commons.pool.impl)(version>=1.4.0)(! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> (version>=1.5.0))) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> While I see an error, it does not tell me a lot ;-) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - Jörg >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>> Guillaume Nodet >>>>>>>> ------------------------ >>>>>>>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ >>>>>>>> ------------------------ >>>>>>>> Open Source SOA >>>>>>>> http://fusesource.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Karl Pauls >>>>>>> karlpa...@gmail.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Guillaume Nodet >>>>>> ------------------------ >>>>>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ >>>>>> ------------------------ >>>>>> Open Source SOA >>>>>> http://fusesource.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Karl Pauls >>>>> karlpa...@gmail.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >
