2014-11-06 11:23 GMT+01:00 Chetan Mehrotra <[email protected]>:
> On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Tommaso Teofili > <[email protected]> wrote: > > - carefully expose only those packages classes we want people to be able > to > > configure: we expose ourselves to issues with semantic versioning, but > in a > > smaller scale > > That would be desirable but brittle to support. As the underlying > library does not support semantic versioning we would not be able to > do that either. I would prefer expose the packages with understanding > that bundle which implement oak-lucene SPI need to > > 1. Either have broader import range if they are working with stable classes > 2. Be prepared to rebuild the bundle > > Given that such bundles would be in low minority it should be manageable. > I'm a bit skeptical not because it wouldn't work but mostly because the correct behavior would depend on oak-lucene SPI users to read the doc :-) Another concern (but I'm not 100% sure) is that this may break setups where Lucene classes would be exported correctly by some other Lucene-over-OSGi-enabling-bundle (e.g. ServiceMix) and used by other non-Oak-bundles. Regards, Tommaso > > Chetan Mehrotra >
