On 12/10/14 15:15, rsteppac2 wrote:
Neil,
thank you for your input!
First of all, you are right in that I don't have much OSGi experience in
general. I understand your point about substitutable alternatives for a
given API version.
But in my experience, in an enterprise production environment, you don't
want any of that dynamic behavior because it may lead to hard to debug
application behavior if the versions of the implementations are not
enforced.
Anyway, I think I understood that this is against the grain of the OSGi
paradigm and if I want it to be more strict, I have to deal with the more
explicit configuration.
Do read up on semantic versioning if you're going to do OSGi.
It's such an integral part of OSGi that you can't do without.
Once you've read up, you'll see your own comments in a different light ;-)
Many of the OSGi devs come from 'enterprise' backgrounds. We know when
you're at, you just don't get where we're at. After reading up you'll
better understand that :-)
Thanks!
Ralf
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-felix.18485.x6.nabble.com/Why-import-version-range-if-exact-version-of-dependency-is-known-tp5010123p5010129.html
Sent from the Apache Felix - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@felix.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@felix.apache.org
--
Ferry Huberts
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@felix.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@felix.apache.org
