On 21/11/2012 13:24, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Both I would say ;) Both for client POM, anything else on trunk-only: we agreed on removing any OSGi-related modification due to SYNCOPE-203, right?
Regards. > On 11/21/2012 01:19 PM, Francesco Chicchiriccò wrote: >> On 21/11/2012 13:17, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: >>> Hi Colm, >>> >>> if you don't mind, I can do it. >>> I have some new stuff to add around OSGi. >> >> Into branch 1_0_X (as per Colm's request) or trunk? >> >> Regards. >> >>> By the way, no objection on my side ;) >>> >>> Regards >>> JB >>> >>> On 11/21/2012 01:14 PM, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote: >>>> Hi guys, >>>> >>>> Are there any objections if I backport the (OSGi) changes to >>>> client/pom.xml >>>> that JB made to the 1_0_X branch? That would enable me to use >>>> Syncope's >>>> REST API in a third party application deployed to an OSGi container. >>>> Core/Console would be unaffected. >>>> >>>> Colm. -- Francesco Chicchiriccò ASF Member, Apache Cocoon PMC and Apache Syncope PPMC Member http://people.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
