Perhaps we are not talking about the same thing. If you follow what I think you are saying, you would end up with one bundle for the whole system. Clearly bundles use other services so for a bundle to work, bundles supplying the other services need to be installed. That is a harder problem to manage/address (dependencies are less well specified) than saying that you need an API bundle as well.
Anyway, I think we are all in violent agreement that best practices around bundling of packages is contextual. The only differences appearing stem from our varied backgrounds and contexts. Jeff > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:osgi-dev- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Kriens > Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 2:28 AM > To: OSGi Developer Mail List > Subject: Re: [osgi-dev] Put API/SPI/implementation into separate > bundles? > > Well, maybe part of the problem is that bundles are not self contained? > > I often see bundles that can only live when some other bundles are > around as well, tightly coupled. Why not put these bundles in one > bundle? > > I do believe repositories are necessary, but I am also a strong > believer of doing > it right from the beginning and not using the tools to solve problems > that were > created earlier. The tools already have a hard enough time with the > intrinsic > complexity. > > Kind regards, > > Peter Kriens > > On 3 jun 2008, at 14:15, Jeff McAffer wrote: > > >> I think it is crucial that bundles run out of the box and not > require > >> you to chase other bundles to get it to work. This first level > >> experience is > >> quite important. Just doubling the number of bundles because you > >> might > >> have > >> to stop a bundle does not like the right trade off to me. > >> > >> In the OSGi build, all the implementations care the interfaces they > >> implement > >> so they always run out of the box so setup is simplified. > > > > It is important to simplify consumption. Agreed. However, > > personally I > > don't find this to be a motivating argument here. In our experience > > writing > > large OSGi-based systems it is relatively rare that a bundle > > implementation > > is self-contained so putting the API with the impl still does not > > give you > > just one bundle you can install and run. > > > > Instead I would prefer to see people use a comprehensive provisioning > > mechanism (insert shameless plug for p2) rather than sacrifice > > architecture > > or flexibility. This is not to say that putting API with impl is > > wrong, > > just that the "out of the box" argument does not work for me. > > > > Jeff > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OSGi Developer Mail List > > osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org > > https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev > > _______________________________________________ > OSGi Developer Mail List > osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org > https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev _______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
