Hi Rajini I'd forgotten about project-info-reports. Thanks for reminding me!. I think the answer here is for us to get our poms right so that all dependencies have the correct scope. I'm happy to help out here. It's easy enough to work out which are compile time dependencies but it's note clear that we are marking runtime/test dependencies accurately. I don't think there is an automatic way of distinguishing.
Simon On 11/8/07, Rajini Sivaram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Simon, > > maven-bundle-plugin can be used to generate manifest files for the jar > files, but the recommended practice is to explicitly specify the exported > packages rather than export everything from the jar. I tried to use this > to > generate manifest files for all the third party jars separately, but I > couldn't get these jars to install and resolve under Felix. So at the > moment, there is a single large third party jar with hardcoded > export-packages. Once the bundles are finalized, I will try and use > maven-bundle-plugin to generate as much of the manifest as possible. > > Most of the 3rd party jars do not have OSGi manifest headers ( a few like > SDO do). I will try and use existing headers wherever they are available > (again, I will try to do this after the bundles are finalized). > > I had a look at the dependency graph generated by "mvn > project-info-reports:dependencies", and the dependency tree format looks > much more usable to generate a full visual graph of the dependencies, > compared to a flat classpath. My only concern is that many of the test > dependencies in the modules are not marked with scope test and would > probably result in unnecessary dependencies (and I am not sure which > dependencies I can safely remove). > > Thank you... > > Regards, > > Rajini > > On 11/7/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 11/7/07, Rajini Sivaram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1897 creates a set of > > > bundles > > > to enable Tuscany to be run inside an OSGi runtime. At the moment, > there > > > are > > > five bundles: > > > > > > 1. org.apache.tuscany.sca.api.jar 18,701 > > > 2. org.apache.tuscany.spi.jar 430,563 > > > 3. org.apache.tuscany.runtime.jar 538,660 > > > 4. org.apache.tuscany.extensions.jar 1,374,045 > > > 5. org.apache.tuscany.depends.jar 57,872,558 > > > > > > I would like to split the 3rd party bundle first and then possibly the > > > Tuscany extensions bundle. Ideally I would like to have bundles which > > > match > > > the jar files provided in "distribution" so that OSGi manifest headers > > can > > > be added to the jars in "distribution" enabling a binary Tuscany > > > distribution to be run under OSGi. > > > > > > I would like to satisfy as many of Sebastien's use cases ( > > > http://marc.info/?l=tuscany-dev&m=119326781123561&w=2) as possible. > But > > I > > > am > > > not sure what the granularity of the bundles should be if we want to > > have > > > the same set of jars for both an OSGi and non-OSGi distribution. More > > fine > > > grained jars provide better versioning under OSGi, but requires the > > > maintenance of more package dependencies in the manifest files. Would > it > > > be > > > better to group related 3rd party jars together (eg. all Axis2 related > > > jars > > > into one bundle) where each jar belongs to one and only one bundle? > > > > > > Any thoughts on what the Tuscany distribution should look like (should > > it > > > continue to be the current list of jars, or should related jars be > > grouped > > > together), and on the granularity required for versioning when running > > > Tuscany under OSGi are appreciated. > > > > > > > > > Ant, > > > > > > Would it be possible for you to provide a list of third party jars > used > > by > > > each extension? Since maven dependencies in the extension/pom.xml > > include > > > the dependencies for testing (sometimes without a scope), I am not > sure > > if > > > I > > > could use a dependency list generated by maven. > > > > > > > > > Thank you... > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Rajini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/25/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 10/25/07, Rajini Sivaram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > This does imply splitting both Tuscany extension bundle > > > > > and the big 3rd party bundle, into smaller chunks. Because of its > > > size, > > > > I > > > > > am > > > > > more inclined to split the 3rd party bundle into smaller bundles > > first > > > > > (though I have no idea where to start with this huge big list of > jar > > > > > files). > > > > > > > > > > > > I can help with that, after doing lots of releases i've a good > > > > understanding > > > > of what each jar is for and what uses it. How about starting with > > > whatever > > > > bundle make up is easiest for you and then we can juggle things > around > > > to > > > > get to something everyone is happy with. > > > > > > > > ...ant > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Rajini > > > > Some OSGi novice questions... > > > > Is there any automation available for management the OSGi manifests? > > Do any of the jars we depend on already come with suitable manifest > > information for grouping jars? > > > > I was trying to work out how to get the non-test dependency list the > other > > day. I didn't look that hard but the answer wasn't obvious. The only > > (semi-)automatic way I can think of doing it is to comment out the test > > dependencies and then look at the maven classpath that results (e.g. mvn > > dependency:build-classpath) > > > > Regards > > > > Simon > > >
