Would it make more sense to have something a bit more extensible than an
attribute? For example, I had some bundles I wanted installed on an IBM JDK,
but not on a Sun JDK. Also, JDK 7 vs 6 differences and such can also come
into play. I'm kind of thinking something similar to the Maven profile
activation element things, but make it actually work. :-) We could add
<and> and <or> elements and such in there.
Either that or define a simple DSL for the attribute
install="${Java.Version}=7" etc....
Dan
On Wednesday, October 12, 2011 12:13:23 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> I also prefer a feature attribute.
> Guillaume just mentioned that it means it's "built-in" the feature, and
> don't let the user choose its behavior.
>
> Regarding the attribute name, install="auto" or install="manual" looks
> good to me.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 10/12/2011 12:10 PM, Ioannis Canellos wrote:
> > I would prefer an attribute in the feature descriptor, as it would
> > provide more granularity for custom features.
> > We may need to rethink the name of the attribute to avoid confusing our
> > users.
> >
> > maybe call it manual="true/false" or deploy="auto/manual"
--
Daniel Kulp
[email protected]
http://dankulp.com/blog
Talend - http://www.talend.com
