2011/7/25 Marshall Schor <[email protected]> > Leaving aside the question of whether or not to ship OSGi versions of > add-on > annotators for the moment :-), > > I'm thinking of redoing the pom structure for this, in order to eliminate > the > possibility of Licenses, Notices, and dependencies getting "out of sync" > between > the ogsi versions and the non-osgi versions. >
I agree this should be unified. > > To do this, I would do the following: > > 1) remove the addons-osgi and all of its subprojects. > > 2) add a new packaging type to the set of things we produce - currently we > produce things like Jars and PEAR packagings. The OSGi packaging would be > an > additional kind. > so this would impact existing projects' POMs right? I proposed such a change some time ago which I think would be less hard to maintain [1]. > > It would use the identical LICENSE and NOTICE files, and the same > dependencies. > > Now, I know that some of the OSGi packagings have *different* dependencies > - but > it seems to me this is likely some kind of error - I can't think of a > reason why > they would need to be different! > for some of those additional dependencies they just came from trying to start them within a clean Apache Felix installation. > > This would shrink the source footprint and make future maintenance easier > (only > need to update things in one place). > > Is there a reason to keep the separate OSGi source pom structures, that I'm > missing? What do others think of this proposal? > I completely agree, +1. Tommaso [1] : http://markmail.org/message/4gtj6iwvjg3a6cvw > > -Marshall >
