On Sep 10, 2009, at 1:43 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
On Sep 10, 2009, at 9:44 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 17:54, Kevan Miller
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Sep 10, 2009, at 4:29 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I've uploaded a new 1.0.0 release of the blueprint project.
I think I've addressed all the issues raised in the discussion
thread.
The staging repository is available at:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/geronimo-staging-054/
The corresponding tag is available at
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/components/blueprint/tags/blueprint-1.0.0/
Please review and vote:
[ ] +1 Release
[ ] -1 Do not release
The vote will remain open for 72 hours.
The following files do not contain apache source license headers.
./blueprint-api/src/main/java/org/osgi/service/blueprint/container/
package.html
./blueprint-api/src/main/java/org/osgi/service/blueprint/container/
packageinfo
./blueprint-api/src/main/java/org/osgi/service/blueprint/reflect/
package.html
./blueprint-api/src/main/java/org/osgi/service/blueprint/reflect/
packageinfo
Those come straight from the blueprint OSGi from the osgi alliance
afaik.
I can add them with the OSGi alliance copyright, but I'm not even
sure
what's the comments syntax for the packageinfo file
Should these maybe be released separately, like the spec jars?
They are already in a separate bundle/jar, and since there's a good
chance that all of the blueprint implementation will go elsewhere soon
I'm not sure its a good idea to move the api jar away from the impl
jar. In principle however I think that would be a good next step when
a more final location for blueprint is clear.
thanks
david jencks
Regards,
Alan
