Am Wednesday 29 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
The pom clearly works since we build the bundle correctly using it. I'm
betting you are trying to use it in a way we didn't intend so can you
provide information on what you are doing so we can look into it?
haha - nice one. Is there a
Hi Oliver one more comment :-)
On Jun 29, 2011, at 3:57 PM, Oliver Lietz wrote:
Am Wednesday 29 June 2011 schrieb David Jencks:
Hi Oliver,
hi David,
maven != osgi.
I think the document about how the bundle is intended to be used is the
bundle manifest. The pom is there to build
Thanks for your reply Alasdair,
Reading the documentation about the JPA support it seems like in 0.4, it is
no longer necessary to list all classes in the persistence.xml. That's an
improvement I'm really interested in which is why asked about the 0.4
release. I also use Karaf+Camel and I'm used
Hello Alasdair,
I endorse the point of view of both Bengt and Harald. It will be very
interesting to release the enhancement allowing the runtime enhancer. This
feature is more 'compatible' with the loose-coupling best-practice. Why
should my 'entities bundles' know about their JPA Provider?
I
, 28 Jun 2011 09:18:51 +
Subject: Re: 0.4
From: younes.ou...@gmail.com
To: user@aries.apache.org
Hello Alasdair,
I endorse the point of view of both Bengt and Harald. It will be very
interesting to release the enhancement allowing the runtime enhancer. This
feature is more 'compatible
, but now that Equinox
3.7 and the OSGi 4.3 API are available it should be possible for us to get
the build into a release-able state
Regards,
Tim
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:18:51 +
Subject: Re: 0.4
From: younes.ou...@gmail.com
To: user@aries.apache.org
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Bengt Rodehav be...@rodehav.com wrote:
Now that you seem to release the sub projects independently (which I guess
is good since it enables more frequent releases) it is important to document
what versions of the different sub projects are compatible with each
Yeah, I guess you're right. I'm just a little sloppy when it comes to OSGi
versioning myself...
/Bengt
2011/6/28 Jacek Laskowski ja...@japila.pl
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Bengt Rodehav be...@rodehav.com wrote:
Now that you seem to release the sub projects independently (which I
Am Monday 27 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
Hi,
hey,
I don't think there are any plans. In the past releases have been more
on demand.
After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release process so
their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were previously. Some
Am Tuesday 28 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
Alasdair Nottingham
On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:06, Oliver Lietz apa...@oliverlietz.de wrote:
Am Monday 27 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
Hi,
hey,
I don't think there are any plans. In the past releases have been more
on
Alasdair Nottingham
On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:46, Oliver Lietz apa...@oliverlietz.de wrote:
Am Tuesday 28 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
Alasdair Nottingham
On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:06, Oliver Lietz apa...@oliverlietz.de wrote:
Am Monday 27 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
Hi,
Hi,
I don't think there are any plans. In the past releases have been more on
demand.
After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release process so
their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were previously. Some bundles
might be at 0.4 and some at 0.3.1.
Do you need a release?
12 matches
Mail list logo