Ant, Thank you.
I was planning to remove the support for <implementation.osgi/> attributes, making it not backward compatible. That was one of the reasons I wanted to introduce the change before 1.0. Is that a problem? Thank you... Regards, Rajini On 8/30/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 8/29/07, Rajini Sivaram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > We would like to start supporting SCA annotations in implementation > > classes > > used inside OSGi bundles to make implementation.osgi consistent with > > implementation.java. > > > > In the current implementation, SCA annotations are only supported for > > annotations used in interfaces, since we were keen on supporting > existing > > OSGi bundles without any change. This meant that additional SCA > properties > > like @AllowsPassByReference had to be supported through additional > > attributes on the <implementation.osgi/> element. But since these > > properties > > do not have an OSGi equivalent, they cannot be used with existing OSGi > > bundles, and for new implementations which support these properties, we > > would like to support SCA annotations to make the OSGi implementation > > consistent with the Java implementation. > > > > This is a fairly big change in implementation.osgi, and I would like > your > > views on whether this is a good time to make the change, so that > > the implementation will reflect the long-term strategy in the next > > release. > > I can submit a patch early next week if it can be integrated before the > > release. > > > If you think it can be done in time then I think you should go for it, i'd > commit any patches for you. The next release is 1.0 with the branch for > that being taken around the 14th of September. If you can get patches > submitted by at least a few days before then and the testcases and samples > are working after the changes then I can't see any problem with going > ahead > now. > > Just to confirm one thing, are the changes going to be backward > compatible, > i.e. would SCDL that works today keep on working after the changes are > done? > > ...ant >
