In the change I now did to replace the bnd files I did not set any special configs in the parent. Of cause this makes the individual poms a little bit more verbose as you have to repeat the snippet for the maven-bundle-plugin. Still I think this is better than using properties. Simply because nothing strange happens. Each bundle describes clearly what it needs and offer in OSGi.
I still prefer the bnd files but as we decided to go with the pom config I strongly prefer this simple style. Christian 2016-02-17 13:18 GMT+01:00 Łukasz Dywicki <l...@code-house.org>: > Since entire thing is going slowly into end I just wanted to clarify one > statement from Christian’s earier mail: > > > > Wiadomość napisana przez Christian Schneider <ch...@die-schneider.net> > w dniu 16 lut 2016, o godz. 10:29: > > > > On 16.02.2016 08:46, Guillaume Nodet wrote: > >> Fwiw, if I had to do it again from scratch, I would not introduce > >> properties for the OSGi bnd instructions again. > >> The main reason is that the maven bundle plugin / bnd tools do make a > >> difference between a property which is not set and a property which is > >> empty. When it's not set, it usually has a good default (for the most > used > >> properties). > >> The default values are usually good ones, and it can be very difficult > to > >> overcome the fact that the parent plugin defines them as empty. > > So if I interpret you correctly then we would not set properties in the > parent pom like Lukasz proposed. I fully agree with you even if it makes > the configs more verbose. > > After rereading the example from Lukasz I found that he proposes to set > the default exports like in Aries to export a package named like the > groupId which is really bad. > My proposal was not to use group id as package name but combination of > group and artifact id which should always give unique namespace of bundle. > I don’t think we have that in Karaf now (however I didn’t verify that too), > so it was rather free idea thrown in conversation. > > Guillaume - in which cases you noticed different behavior for empty and > undefined properties? It could be worth for keeping this knowledge for > future discussions. > > Cheers, > Łukasz > — > l...@code-house.org > Twitter: ldywicki > Blog: http://dywicki.pl > Code-House - http://code-house.org > > > -- -- Christian Schneider http://www.liquid-reality.de <https://owa.talend.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=3aa4083e0c744ae1ba52bd062c5a7e46&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.liquid-reality.de> Open Source Architect http://www.talend.com <https://owa.talend.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=3aa4083e0c744ae1ba52bd062c5a7e46&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.talend.com>
