On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 10:10 AM, Raymond Auge <raymond.a...@liferay.com> wrote:
> Sorry, I'm travelling this week so that's why I didn't act on this yet. > > What you can do temporarily to solve the issue is to explicitly widen the > range of the imports on BOTH modules (noting that the JAXRS spec is > actually backward compatible through major versions). > > e.g. > > Import-Package: javax.ws.rs.*;=version='[1.0,3)' > Import-Package: javax.ws.rs.*;version='[1.0,3)' > > That would be the shortest path to solving the mutual exclusive ranges. > > - Ray > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 9:59 AM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid> > wrote: > >> Raymond do you have a quick fix at hand?Would love to ship a Johnzon >> release. Have a spare cycle today... >> LieGrue,strub >> >> On Friday, 22 June 2018, 16:22:20 CEST, Romain Manni-Bucau < >> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Raymond, >> >> looks weird, jaxrs should be [1.0,) for everything, it is due to the >> spec.version in the pom and does it mean we "just" have to explicitly set >> it? >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog >> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github < >> https://github.com/rmannibucau> | >> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book >> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8- >> high-performance> >> >> >> Le ven. 22 juin 2018 à 15:21, Raymond Auge <raymond.a...@liferay.com> a >> écrit : >> >> > Hello all, >> > >> > I've found a small issue when trying to assemble a system from Johnzon's >> > JAXRS providers. >> > >> > If you look at the package imports for johnzon-jaxrs: >> > >> > javax.ws.rs {version=[2.0,3)} >> > javax.ws.rs.core {version=[2.0,3)} >> > javax.ws.rs.ext {version=[2.0,3)} >> > >> > and those from johnzon-jsonb: >> > >> > javax.ws.rs {version=[1.1,2), >> > resolution:=optional} >> > javax.ws.rs.core {version=[1.1,2), >> > resolution:=optional} >> > javax.ws.rs.ext {version=[1.1,2), >> > resolution:=optional} >> > >> > You'll notice that they have mutually exclusive version ranges, which >> means >> > they will never work together properly in the same OSGi runtime (at >> least >> > not in a _hack-free_ runtime.) >> > >> > So, will anyone mind if when the geronimo specs release with proper >> > Portable Java Contracts (shortly hopefully) that I send a PR to apply >> these >> > to johnzon? >> > >> > I've created an issue for it >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JOHNZON-174 >> > >> > Sincerely, >> > -- >> > *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) >> > >> > > > > -- > *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) > -- *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)
