On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 6:22 PM, Jörg Schaible<[email protected]> wrote:
> Barrie Treloar wrote at Mittwoch, 19. August 2009 10:15:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Lewis, Eric<[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> I know just a little bit about OSGi  :-)
>>>
>>> About 1)
>>> This isn't possible, since the OSGi Manifest states what packages are
>>> visible for the user of the JAR. You can't automate that, it has to be
>>> planned by the authors.
>>
>> I think I've posted about this before but not really given it enough
>> thought.
>>
>> I still can't see why if it is not OSGi compliant that the default
>> position it to make the entire jar packages visible.
>> Since that's what is happening in an non-OSGi environment anyway.
>
> And as a result you get this:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONFIGURATION-392

That's a bug with the way defaults are being generated.
Not that you can't create something sane as a default.

I thought with OSGi you can specify optional dependencies.
Its been a while since I've looked at the spec.

What I think I want as defaults:
* Export everything package that the jar defines
* All non-test dependencies declared as optional (so you dont have to
pull in the kitchen sink, but it does mean you have to do more work to
manage the dependencies)
* No test dependencies.

Yes this the "quick'n'dirty" solution.
But I think it is better than creating a parallel tree that has been
OSGified (like the spring sources)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to