Re: Proposal for slight amendment to Felix provisional OSGi API policy

+1 Good point ! Regards JB On 12/23/2016 05:54 PM, Raymond Auge wrote: +1 I'd really like this support as well. As an RI writer the prospect of having to use a different package name during the API development process is not appealing at all. - Ray On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 8:01 AM, Bram

Re: Proposal for slight amendment to Felix provisional OSGi API policy

I'm not for changing the policy. The whole point behind the policy is that anything that we released is in some way blessed and lives forever. If we release packages in the OSGi namespace, they look official even potentially after the OSGi Alliance dumps an RFC (ala Gogo). There is no way for

Re: Proposal for slight amendment to Felix provisional OSGi API policy

+1 I'd really like this support as well. As an RI writer the prospect of having to use a different package name during the API development process is not appealing at all. - Ray On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 8:01 AM, Bram Pouwelse wrote: > I Like the simple version (

[jira] [Updated] (FELIX-5435) Service does not get loaded with updated properties that have been modified on file system after felix framework restart

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5435?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Alin Brici updated FELIX-5435: -- Attachment: FELIX_5435.patch > Service does not get loaded with updated properties that have been

[jira] [Commented] (FELIX-5435) Service does not get loaded with updated properties that have been modified on file system after felix framework restart

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5435?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15773228#comment-15773228 ] Alin Brici commented on FELIX-5435: --- [~djencks], I have made the modification in CA that would fix this

[jira] [Updated] (FELIX-5435) Service does not get loaded with updated properties that have been modified on file system after felix framework restart

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5435?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Alin Brici updated FELIX-5435: -- Affects Version/s: configadmin-1.8.0 configadmin-1.8.8

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Felix shell.remote version 1.2.0

This vote passed with three binding +1 and no -1 votes. On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Carsten Ziegeler wrote: > +1 > > > > > -- > Carsten Ziegeler > Adobe Research Switzerland > cziege...@apache.org > >

Re: Proposal for slight amendment to Felix provisional OSGi API policy

I Like the simple version ( org.osgi.someapi; version="0.1"; mandatory:="provisional"; provisional="felix" ), and then I think it makes sense to advise a bit more conservative import range like Import-Package: org.osgi.someapi;version="[0.1,0.2)";provisional=felix And that also implies that the

Re: Proposal for slight amendment to Felix provisional OSGi API policy

> On 23 Dec 2016, at 13:36, David Bosschaert wrote: > > Hi all, > > On 23 December 2016 at 12:13, Jan Willem Janssen < > janwillem.jans...@luminis.eu> wrote: > >> >>> On 23 Dec 2016, at 12:30, David Bosschaert >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi

Re: Proposal for slight amendment to Felix provisional OSGi API policy

This suggestion from David sounds like a reasonable compromise to me. I would point out that if you are building with bnd and you put a bundle with a mandatory attribute on your build path, then bnd will assume that you want to set that attribute on your import. Thus it will work fairly

Re: Proposal for slight amendment to Felix provisional OSGi API policy

Hi all, On 23 December 2016 at 12:13, Jan Willem Janssen < janwillem.jans...@luminis.eu> wrote: > > > On 23 Dec 2016, at 12:30, David Bosschaert > wrote: > > > > Hi Bram, > > > > On 23 December 2016 at 11:02, Bram Pouwelse wrote: > > > >>> I think

Re: Proposal for slight amendment to Felix provisional OSGi API policy

> On 23 Dec 2016, at 12:30, David Bosschaert wrote: > > Hi Bram, > > On 23 December 2016 at 11:02, Bram Pouwelse wrote: > >>> I think it would be nice if we could relax the policy at [1] a little bit >> and say that it is ok to release bundles

Re: Proposal for slight amendment to Felix provisional OSGi API policy

In that case I don't like the idea of released bundles using API versions < 1. What if some other bundle is providing that same package there would be no way for te resolver to know that those packages are actually not compatible. On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 12:30 PM David Bosschaert <

Re: Proposal for slight amendment to Felix provisional OSGi API policy

Hi Bram, On 23 December 2016 at 11:02, Bram Pouwelse wrote: > > I think it would be nice if we could relax the policy at [1] a little bit > and say that it is ok to release bundles with provisional API in versions < > 1.0. The OSGi APIs always start their versions at 1.0 so

Re: Proposal for slight amendment to Felix provisional OSGi API policy

> I think it would be nice if we could relax the policy at [1] a little bit and say that it is ok to release bundles with provisional API in versions < 1.0. The OSGi APIs always start their versions at 1.0 so an API version 0.2 will never conflict with an OSGi released API. That sounds nice but

RE: [ANN] New Apache Felix Committer: Stefan Seifert

thanks! it is a tradition that a new committer introduces himself, so here are some words about myself: i'm living in berlin, and using OSGi and Felix for about 7 years. i'm also heavily involved in the Apache Sling community where i'm committer since 2014. but my first relevant contribution

[ANN] New Apache Felix Committer: Stefan Seifert

Hi it's my pleasure to announce that the Apache Felix PMC has invited Stefan Seifert as a new Felix committer...and gladly Stefan accepted. So please join me in welcoming Stefan. Regards Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler Adobe Research Switzerland cziege...@apache.org