First of all, this should be asked on [EMAIL PROTECTED] Secondly, Pax Web is not "Jetty" but an implementation of the OSGi Http Service spec, plus various extensions. It just happen to use Jetty to back it. Now, IIRC, it still exports and imports (accroding to OSGi guidelines) the Jetty packages, so what you are sugesting *should* be possible. If Pax Web doesn't export+import the packages, then I think that is a bug and file an issue, and we will take care of it.
Cheers Niclas On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Brett Wooldridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Is there a reason that you have chosen to include the Jetty 6 classes in > your own OSGi bundle? Doesn't it make more sense to deploy the OSGi bundles > supplied by Jetty? By including the classes in your bundle, users no longer > have the choice of upgrading to a newer version of Jetty 6 (possibly due to > a security issue) while remaining at the same level of OPS4j, or upgrading > OPS4j while remaining at the same level of Jetty 6. There are also many > other Jetty modules, such as annotations, Java 5 threadpool, etc. which > user's might want to deploy along side Jetty 6. > > So, I guess my question is, can OPS4j (pax-web-service) be refactored to > simply rely on the standard Jetty OSGi bundles rather than containing them? > > Thanks, > Brett Wooldridge > www.ziptie.org > > _______________________________________________ > infra mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/infra > > _______________________________________________ general mailing list general@lists.ops4j.org http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
