directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Karasulu <akaras...@apache.org>
Subject Re: shared-ldap merge done
Date Mon, 20 Sep 2010 21:18:08 GMT
On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Stefan Seelmann <seelmann@apache.org>wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 7:09 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny <elecharny@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I have successfully merged many modules in shared. The remaining modules
> are
> > :
> > - ldap-client-api
> > - shared-all
> > - shared-dsml-parser
> > - shared-i18n
> > - shared-ldap
> > - shared-ldap-jndi
> > - shared-ldap-schema
>
> Thanks Emmanuel!
>
> > There are a few more things we could do here :
> > - ldap-client-api should also be merged in shared-ldap
> > - shared-ldap-schema is a separate module, but I think it could also be
> > injected into shared-ldap
> > - shared-i18n is a separate module for convenience reason : it would have
> > been painful to work on translation in another module.
>
> Ok
>
> > We can discuss further about what should be done in this area, I don't
> want
> > to go too far and have to rollback.
> >
> > The next big step will be the shared/api renaming, something I'd like to
> do
> > either this week-end or at the very beginning of next week. Then we will
> > probably be ready for a API/shared release.
> >
> > One more thing, just to clarify my last mail about OSGi (I read it and
> found
> > it a bit like I was micro-managing) : I think that we should wait for the
> > next release of ADS (ie, post 2.0.0-RC1) because we will probably do some
> > other changes in shared (like rename it to API) and we would like to
> release
> > this asap. Working in a branch on OSGi is just a way to be sure that
> there
> > won't be any contention in this area, and of course, if the OSGi
> > implementation is finished before we are ready for a release, I have
> nothing
> > against merging back the branch into trunk.
>
> Is it really that difficult to make shared/api OSGi bundles? Please
> correct me if I' wrong, but we just need to add the right
> META-INF/MANIFEST.MF that could be generated by the Felix plugin.
> Additionally we need to make sure that we have now split packages,
> that is atm the case for o.a.d.shared.ldap.schema, but could be fixed
> easy. My hope is that we can then use the shared/api bundle directly
> in Studio.
>
>
Exactly it's not so much the manifest generation which is really easy with
the Maven OSGi Plugin using BND. The problem really is making sure we have
split packages. I wanted to sit down and review the current breakdown of our
classes, interfaces and packages to see if we had the proper
package/class/interface layout. The only part that I was worried about is
getting all the exported classes right so the API will function properly.

I also thought this would be great for Studio as well cuz then the API jar
is a bundle on it's own rather than being embedded into another bundle.

-- 
Alex Karasulu
My Blog :: http://www.jroller.com/akarasulu/
Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org
Apache MINA :: http://mina.apache.org
To set up a meeting with me: http://tungle.me/AlexKarasulu

Mime
View raw message