On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 5:22 PM Raymond Auge <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 11:07 AM, Karl Pauls <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 11:39 PM Raymond Auge <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Anyone mind if I release the felix Log which I've upgraded to Log Service
> > > 1.4?
> >
> > Not at all - great that you got this done!
> >
> > > It passes the CT in all respects except for it doesn't yet implement the
> > > LogStreamProvider which is ideally implemented as a separate artifact so
> > > that the plain log doesn't drag in pushstream, promise & function.
> > >
> > > However,
> > >
> > > Do you think I should just add these dependencies to Felix log, bundle
> > the
> > > LogStreamProvider and be done with it?
> >
> > Well, how much effort would it be to keep it separate?
> >
>
> I started looking at this more closely today and I feel it should be
> separated. In fact I am going to remove the direct dependency on
> ConfigurationAdmin because it's breaking the usage of the log API on the
> framework classpath.
>
> So yeah, I've convinced myself to keep it separate. I hope that's ok.

Sure, the less dependencies the core has the better :-)

Thanks again for looking into this!

regards,

Karl

> - Ray
>
>
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Karl
> >
> > > Currently this upgraded felix Log already adds a dependency on
> > > org.osgi.service.cm.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > > --
> > > *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
> > >  (@rotty3000)
> > > Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
> > >  (@Liferay)
> > > Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org>
> > (@OSGiAlliance)
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Karl Pauls
> > [email protected]
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
>  (@rotty3000)
> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
>  (@Liferay)
> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org> (@OSGiAlliance)



-- 
Karl Pauls
[email protected]

Reply via email to