Thanks, Andreas! This will be tracked in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4439
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Andreas Pieber <anpie...@gmail.com> wrote: > Finally I had the minutes to hack anything together. The script could > be found here [1] and shows the following conflicts (and I'm > positively surprised by the low number :-)): > > Package: org.apache.wicket.request.handler.logger in wicket-core, > wicket-request, > Package: org.apache.wicket.util.string.interpolator in wicket-core, > wicket-util, > Package: org.apache.wicket.request.mapper in wicket-core, wicket-request, > Package: org.apache.wicket.util.resource in wicket-core, wicket-util, > Package: org.apache.wicket.util.io in wicket-core, wicket-util, > Package: org.apache.wicket.request.handler in wicket-core, wicket-request, > Package: org.apache.wicket.util.file in wicket-core, wicket-util, > Package: org.apache.wicket.request in wicket-core, wicket-request, > Package: org.apache.wicket in wicket-core, wicket-util, > Package: org.apache.wicket.util.string in wicket-core, wicket-util, > Package: org.apache.wicket.util.crypt in wicket-core, wicket-util, > Package: org.apache.wicket.util.lang in wicket-core, wicket-util, > > Kind regards, > Andreas > > [1] https://gist.github.com/1977817 > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:44, Andreas Pieber <anpie...@gmail.com> wrote: >> not that I know of, but this should be a small and neat enough >> python/perl/shell script to extract the list. I can give it a shot later >> this week if you like. >> >> Kind regards, >> Andreas >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 08:37, Martin Grigorov <mgrigo...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> OK. >>> Is there any handy tool that automatically will check for these >>> problems and tell us how many packages need to be renamed ? >>> AFAIK there are no cyclic dependency between Wicket's modules. >>> >>> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 5:12 AM, Andreas Pieber <anpie...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > Hey, >>> > >>> > I second Brain on this one: As long as package names do not overlap and >>> > there are no circular dependencies between the bundles I see no reason >>> > to >>> > object. >>> > >>> > Kind regards, >>> > Andeas >>> > >>> > On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 22:57, Brian Topping <topp...@codehaus.org> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> >> >>> >> On Feb 20, 2012, at 2:53 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote: >>> >> >>> >> > - renaming for OSGi >>> >> > Does anyone have an idea how many packages should be renamed ? >>> >> > Some people say that a package should have its module name in it >>> >> > (e.g. >>> >> > o.a.w.core.**). Other people say that we should rename just the >>> >> > packages which exist in two or more modules. >>> >> >>> >> I didn't see an issue for renaming in Jira, apologies if that was an >>> >> oversight. >>> >> >>> >> There is a "Bundle-SymbolicName" and "Bundle-Version" in the manifest. >>> >> Many OSGi projects use the SymbolicName as the base name for the Maven >>> >> jar >>> >> (i.e. o.a.w.util). >>> >> >>> >> Then make sure that the Maven jar version complies to OSGi numbering >>> >> criteria and use it in both the manifest and the jar version. >>> >> http://semver.org/ is compatible with the OSGi numbering, so if that's >>> >> still the plan, all is good. >>> >> >>> >> As far as packages go, having the bundle SymbolicName as the package >>> >> root >>> >> for the bundle is a good convention (by eliminating package naming >>> >> conflicts), but not required. >>> >> >>> >> If package names do not overlap and circular dependencies between >>> >> bundles >>> >> are removed, the requirements for OSGi should be satisfiable. >>> >> >>> >> Brian >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Martin Grigorov >>> jWeekend >>> Training, Consulting, Development >>> http://jWeekend.com >> >> -- Martin Grigorov jWeekend Training, Consulting, Development http://jWeekend.com
