I meant to collect more simple stats: how many interface users vs interface implementers.
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [osgi-dev] Interpretation of semantic versioning? From: Neil Bartlett <[email protected]> To: OSGi Developer Mail List <[email protected]> Date: Mon 15 Apr 2013 01:07:32 AM CDT > How? > > If such a scanning tool could exist, and was able to tell the > difference between a consumer type and a provider type in arbitrary > code, then we could use the same technique in our build tool and > dispense with the Provider/ConsumerType annotations. > > Neil > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 3:50 AM, Andrei Pozolotin > <[email protected]> wrote: >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: Re: [osgi-dev] Interpretation of semantic versioning? >> From: BJ Hargrave <[email protected]> >> To: OSGi Developer Mail List <[email protected]> >> Date: Sun 14 Apr 2013 04:58:32 PM CDT >> >>> I certainly agree with Emily that having a default of @ProviderType >>> is sensible, since the normal case for most APIs is to call methods >>> on it, not to implement interfaces of it. >> People keep saying this without presenting any data to back it up. I don't >> know that answer but I am not making any claim here. >> >> conceivably, a tool could be made to scan >> * osgi alliance bundles >> * maven central >> * spring obr >> * etc >> >> and collect empirical stats to answer this question. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OSGi Developer Mail List >> [email protected] >> https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev > _______________________________________________ > OSGi Developer Mail List > [email protected] > https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev >
_______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List [email protected] https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
