The first rule when using start levels is "don't use them". When they are *necessary*, it means the bundles misbehave, so if there's something to explain to the users, that's really this rule (which does not prevent users to actually use them, but this decision need to be taken wisely).
In the CXF case, I don't think using start levels is a good solution. The issue you point seems to indicate a resolution order problem, which has nothing to do with bundle start levels. Remember start level only control when bundles are started, i.e. when they usually start consuming or producing OSGi services, so the fact a package has been resolved or not is completely unrelated. So I'd like to understand the side effect and see if we can rather provide a clean solution for the problem instead of misusing start levels. 2013/5/23 Christian Schneider <[email protected]> > It will be no immediate improvement but it will give us a clear concept > how to use start levels. > So I hope that people do not simply introduce new start levels without > checking the concept. > > There is also a "side effect". I am currently building a CXF distro based > on a P2 Repository for a project. > There it is a bit more difficult to use start levels. So I want to make > sure we only use the ones that are really necessary. > Btw. I hope I can port my efforts back to CXF so others can use it too. > > Christian > > > On 23.05.2013 12:12, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > >> Agree, it doesn't have impact to change the log level to use "simple" >> ones, but I don't see a big value. >> >> Regards >> JB >> > > -- > Christian Schneider > http://www.liquid-reality.de > > Open Source Architect > http://www.talend.com > >
