On Aug 1, 2008, at 9:04 AM, Simone Bordet wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 5:16 PM, Alan Cabrera <
adc@...>
> wrote:
>>> the pom for SLP uses packaging "bundle".
>>> Is this necessary ? What advantages over "jar" ?
>>
>> People using OSGi can load it
>
> Well, for that is enough the jar plugin and its manifest
> configuration, no ?
As you've seen, getting the package dependencies can be tricky.
>>> It scares me that if I add a package, or if I type it wrong (like it
>>> was before r469), the classes are not added to the jar, making it
>>> useless.
>>
>> Classes are always added to the jar.
>
> They are not. If you have a typo (for example livetrbe instead of
> livetribe) in the list of packages in the pom, the jar will be empty.
> And if I do not want to export a package on purpose, it will not be in
> the jar. I find this plugin a bit... "strange" :)
Yikes, you're right. That's pretty crappy. I think that maybe a
better way might be to wrap the core jar in an OSGi bundle. Then we
can supply OSGi bundle activators to allow for configuration, etc.
WDYT?
Regards,
Alan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
