Funnily we had a discussion about the start order of bundles in the same start level last week during our OSGi CPEG meeting and leaving out all the nice details, never ever rely on that. And for B we would need changes at least in the launchpad - for A we just fix slf4j
Carsten 2014-01-29 Chetan Mehrotra <[email protected]> > > on the next startup the bundles will again start in an > > unpredictable order, if they have the same start level. > > Aah .. I misread the code. I thought Sling starts the bundle always > though that code path. Missed the facts that such a flow is only used > for new bundles. > > > Chetan, do you see a possible workaround that would allow us > > to wait for the necessary slf4j releases > > There are couple of approaches again then > > A - We create issue on Slf4j and initiate a discussion. This might > take time. Given that Slf4j is MIT licensed [1] we can create our > custom wrapper with the fix and use that in our distributions > > B - We rely on fact (implementation detail) that Felix *does* start > bundle in same order in the way they were installed [2]. We go for > approach #2 I mentioned previously. And as and when Slf4j is fixed we > use that > > > Chetan Mehrotra > [1] http://slf4j.org/license.html > [2] > https://github.com/apache/felix/blob/trunk/framework/src/main/java/org/apache/felix/framework/Felix.java#L4873 > -- Carsten Ziegeler [email protected]
