Hi Marcel,
> On 10. Jul 2023, at 09:06, Marcel Reutegger <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Konrad > > On 03.07.23, 13:27, "Konrad Windszus" <[email protected]> wrote: >> I would recommend to require at least OSGi R7 for Oak (released in 2018) >> and at the same time no longer use the aggregate dependency but rather >> the individual chapter dependencies of OSGi separately [3] which are >> (from Compendium) >> - Configuration Admin 1.6 >> - Declarative Services 1.4 >> - Metatype Service 1.4 >> >> Does anything speak against raising the dependencies accordingly? > > Does this require any code changes? I vaguely remember an earlier attempt > to update OSGi configuration related code throughout the project, which > required many changes and could introduced subtle changes in behaviour if > not done correctly. No it doesn’t require code changes (except for maybe adding some explicit cast to resolve ambiguous method calls. See the PR at https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/pull/1015. You are probably referring to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6741 which is different from this approach, as this is only about updating to a newer version (of the same APIs/Specs) not migrating. > >> Is there any known consumer still relying on Oak in an OSGi container >> which is not at least R7 compliant? > > Can you provide more details how this manifests? Thanks. Sure. As usual newer dependencies lead to import-package headers with version ranges starting with the newer version as lower bound (https://bnd.bndtools.org/chapters/170-versioning.html#import-version-policy) In addition for OSGi Declarative Services there are capabilities being added to the Manifest which require DS 1.4 or newer (https://docs.osgi.org/specification/osgi.cmpn/7.0.0/service.component.html#service.component-capabilities) Both lead to the fact that bundles do not start any longer in OSGi containers not providing the necessary OSGi specifications in at least the given version. Hope this clarifies things, Konrad > > Regards > Marcel
