On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Felix Meschberger <[email protected]> wrote: > ...We basically have two options: > > (1) Keep the implementation and fix the documentation. This would allow us to > keep > the implementation and maintain backwards compatibility at the expense of not > following the OSGi spec > with respect to the service.ranking property...
I'm in favor of this option, including writing integration tests that demonstrate it (yes I volunteer ;-) I don't think the OSGi spec is a problem, we are ordering the services based on that, but then you could argue that filter 1 should be called first because it's 1, or that filter 123456789 should be called first because it has a higher ranking. Let's not break backwards compatibility based on this arbitrary choice of ordering. -Bertrand
