Ok, it seems like now all the changes I've made for the last year +  are 
getting discussed which is good :-)

I'd like to propose that instead of re-maven-ifying ds we gradle-bndtools-ize 
it instead and drop maven entirely from this sub-project.  I haven't had time 
to experiment with this conversion but IIUC Pierre has been trying it out in 
his dependency manager sandbox project.  Unfortunately I haven't even had time 
to investigate that.  Could anyone comment on it?

Based on the speed of the bnd and osgi ct builds I would suspect that it would 
cut the ds build time by about 75%.  However I have no concrete evidence to 
support this.

thanks
david jencks

On Feb 6, 2015, at 3:42 AM, Felix Meschberger <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi
> 
> With FELIX-4537 [1] the bundle plugin configuration was moved out into a .bnd 
> file.
> 
> While the format of either pom.xml or .bnd is debatable I think we should be 
> having a discussion around this. For now we always had all bundle plugin 
> configuration in the pom.xml and I see a clear advantage to that: All 
> configuration for the bundle generation is in one place.
> 
> Apart from this discussion, I think we should switch to using 
> package-info.java files with @Version annotations to have the package version 
> close to the code it describes.
> 
> Also, the .bnd file is not really properly set up, unfortunately:
> 
>  * It hard codes many of the configurations of the POM file. If we stick with 
> the .bnd these values should referenced with variables — if not possible, I 
> fear that would be another argument against the .bnd file…
> 
>  * The bundle must import all exports, this is particularly important for the 
> util.function and util.promise packages.
> 
> I have no hard feelings about whether we keep the .bnd or not. My personal 
> impression is just that having two files to configure things makes it harder 
> to maintain and bears the danger of duplication of information (e.g. the 
> bundle version). So I have slight preference, if you will :-)
> 
> Regards
> Felix
> 
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-4537
> 

Reply via email to