Hi Aki,
let's see what the others think: if all agree, I will go for approach 2.
Regards
JB
On 08/05/2015 07:12 PM, Aki Yoshida wrote:
Hi JB,
Thanks for the explanation.
For the current snapshot version of camel (2.16-SNAPSHOT and
2.15.3-SNAPSHOT), we used approach 1 to solve this problem for now.
If the spec features are made available in one of the Karaf's repos as
in approach 2, that will be great. This can avoid this problem for
other combination in the future or with a combination with other
components that also can use this shared features to avoid getting
into this problem.
Will you be providing the spec features as in approach 2?
Regards, aki
2015-08-05 17:28 GMT+02:00 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>:
Hi Aki,
We have different ways:
1/ we "align" CXF and Camel to the same spec bundle version. As spec bundles
are pretty stable in term of release, I think it's probably the easiest
move, but we don't actually fix the problem if we use old version of one of
the two.
2/ remove spec from CXF and Camel and put a spec feature directly in Karaf,
as we do for jetty, etc.
3/ provision spec bundle in the lib folder as we do for activator spec
bundle
Probably 2 would make sense. Anyway, we will have to update CXF and Camel to
refer to provided spec feature. With Karaf 4 and the new feature resolver,
it would be better to use feature requirements and let the resolver deals
with spec bundle.
Regards
JB
On 08/05/2015 11:38 AM, Aki Yoshida wrote:
Originally, I posted the following mail to dev@camel regarding this issue.
http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Installing-camel-cxf-2-15-2-feature-leads-to-two-versions-of-ServiceMix-Stax-API-bundles-installed-td5769830.html
Currently, both camel and cxf have their features that directly
installing some servicemix-specs bundles. This leads to the problem
mentioned in the above mail thread that installing camel-cxf leads to
installing two versions of servicemix-spec because camel-2.15.2 is
using smx-specs 2.2.0 while cxf-3.0.4 referred in camel-2.15.2 is
using smx-specs 2.4.0.
I am wondering if we need to define this feature (e.g., feature
stax-api-1.0) outside of camel and cxf and both refer to this external
feature using the appropriate version range e.g. [2.2,3) or we can
locally solve this problem within camel and cxf's feature definitions?
I would appreciate for your comments.
regards, aki
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[email protected]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[email protected]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
