aries-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Timothy Ward <>
Subject RE: Wab url handler and imports
Date Thu, 08 Oct 2009 08:21:30 GMT

I agree with Alasdair. The number of WAR library jars that will be OSGi bundles is small,
and it is probably not worth optimising for this case. IMO, if the WAR deployer wants any
OSGi metadata in library jars to be honoured then they should be deploying them as OSGi bundles
in their own right.

I vote +1 for the suggestion that the generated imports are optional, and I am not yet convinced
that we need a config option to change that.



> Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 08:29:28 +0100
> Subject: Re: Wab url handler and imports
> From:
> To:
> I realised this about 30 minutes after I sent the email, although I do
> not really think we should optimise for this. I suspect most library
> jars are not yet OSGi bundles, and if they are they would be better
> off being removed and installed as bundles with the WAR URL Handler
> adding the packages as dependencies.
> One thing we could do is we could have an option on the URL Handler to
> set the packages as optional or not as a deployment option. What do
> people think?
> Thanks
> Alasdair
> 2009/10/8 Valentin Mahrwald <>:
> > On 7 Oct 2009, at 23:21, Alasdair Nottingham wrote:
> >
> >
> > My comment was meant to say that we don't need to scan embedded jars with a
> > bundle manifest since the converter can simply take their dependencies from
> > the available manifest, and then add them to the WAB bundle manifest. I
> > realise this might be slightly more effort then just scanning everything
> > regardless. However, the spirit of RFC 66 to me is to respect existing OSGi
> > metadata wherever possible. So if a utility library has this set we should
> > be using it.
> >
> -- 
> Alasdair Nottingham
View your other email accounts from your Hotmail inbox. Add them now.
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message