OK - that explains it. I guess I will keep my current setup then. It seems
to work, I was just feeling unsure whether I did it the right way.

Thanks a lot for your reply,

/Bengt

Den ons 31 jan. 2024 kl 17:31 skrev Guillaume Nodet <gno...@apache.org>:

> IIUC, there's the runtime and the manipulator (used at build time).
> AFAIK, the runtime already has no problems with JDK > 8, but the
> manipulator was using an old ASM and could not run on JDK > 8.
> With the new release of the manipulator, you need to use iPojo runtime
> 1.12.1 and manipulator 1.13.0 as you indicate.
> And it seems to work as you said... :-)
>
> Le mer. 31 janv. 2024 à 15:51, Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com> a écrit :
> >
> > I tried to use the new (1.13.0) versions in combination with the 1.12.1
> > version of the above mentioned bundle. It seems to work (using openjdk
> 17)
> > but I'm very unsure of what is happening.
> >
> > In build time I use the following artifacts (version 1.13.0):
> >
> > - maven-ipojo-plugin
> > - org.apache.felix.ipojo.manipulator (as a dependency of
> maven-ipojo-plugin)
> > - org.apache.felix.ipojo.annotations
> >
> > In runtime I use:
> >
> > - org.apache.felix.ipojo (version 1.12.1)
> > - org.apache.felix.ipojo.webconsole (version 1.7.0)
> >
> > Is this the way I should use iPojo? Since iPojo 1.12.1 does not support
> > Java > 8, this surprises me. Am I missing something?
> >
> > /Bengt
> >
> >
> > Den tis 30 jan. 2024 kl 17:29 skrev Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com>:
> >
> > > I am trying to use the new iPojo version that was released a couple of
> > > months ago (for which I'm very thankful) but I seem to miss an
> artifact. I
> > > have had the following line in my Karaf feature descriptor:
> > >
> > > <bundle>mvn:org.apache.felix/org.apache.felix.ipojo/1.12.1</bundle>
> > >
> > > But when I now try to switch to iPojo 1.13.0, this artifact does not
> exist
> > > in version 1.13.0.
> > >
> > > Have I misunderstood this? Don't I need this artifact in the Karaf
> runtime?
> > >
> > > /Bengt
> > >
>
>
>
> --
> ------------------------
> Guillaume Nodet
>

Reply via email to