felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Francesco Furfari <francesco.furf...@isti.cnr.it>
Subject Re: Help for M2 safehous repository
Date Fri, 07 Apr 2006 08:06:11 GMT

Enrique Rodriguez wrote:
> On 4/6/06, Francesco Furfari <francesco.furfari@isti.cnr.it> wrote:
>   
>> I need some help to ultimate the UPnP Base Driver building.
>> I should deploy our patched Cyberlink library, who is the guy that can
>> help me ?
>>     
>
> CyberLink for Java is BSD-licensed.  I recommend working to get it
> uploaded to iBiblio.  Ideally, the CyberLink maintainer does this, as
> it'll be his groupId and he'll possibly want other artifacts
> published.  There is a howto at:
>
> http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-ibiblio-upload.html
>
>   
A bit of history just to clarify why we use a patched version of 
Cyberlink lib.
When we released the UPnP Base Driver the OSGi community has begun to 
notify us problems that were
indeed tied to the Cyberlink lib, Stefano as Domoware interface towards  
Cybergarage  has done a great work maintaining the code aligned to the 
original lib and dispatching our patches to Cybergarage.
Obviously the release time of the two versions wasn't always 
synchronized, and many times our version was more updated than the 
original one. At the moment Stefano has been accepted as committer of 
Cyberlink for Java, and even some improvements useful only for the OSGi 
community has been accepted.
So we have good chances in order to get it uploaded to iBiblio, but the 
problems as maintainers of Felix UPnP Base driver still remain, and we 
would like to patch the lib asap it is required.

>> Besides I would like understand if we have to do this independently from
>> Felix
>> or we have to add another project to it.
>>     
>
> Good question.  Is bundling the library jar into individual bundles
> even an option for you?  Or do you have to have a CyberLink Service
> bundle, maybe due to CyberLink binding to a specific port?
>   
This is another point, we used Cyberlink lib because it was a convenient 
way to speed up the development being focused on the OSGi topics, now we 
are in the realm of  HTTP ;-) so probably in the future we can consider 
of refactoring all the stack we use, taking into account also an 
integration with other OSGi service.
I cannot tell you which architecture design is better so far, but I 
would like to share  this effort (analysys) with Felix Team after we 
have a stable R4 release. The important question is that if we release a 
separate Cyberlink bundle we could encourage bad practices because 
developers could use  it to instantiate UPnP devices that are not 
compliant with the OSGi UPnP specification.
> Ideally CyberLink is itself a bundle that can be installed in an OSGi
> container, again ideally something for the CyberLink maintainer to
> handle.  Depending on the source license you could commit the code and
> bundle it at Felix but this isn't ideal for code that has ongoing
> releases, as you'll end up maintaining releases yourself.
>
>   
Yes , I answered above ... the Lib is small, I don't think it is a big 
amount of work moreover the library is enough stable now, the only 
improvement I see at the moment is about its robustness
> So, IMO, try to get the jars into iBiblio and, if size isn't an issue,
> embed them.  Longer term, see about getting the CyberLink maintainer
> to bundle them and keep iBiblio up to date.
>
>   
well, I haven't read your reference to iBiblio yet, but I think that we 
should before ask to the maintainer the consent to use the Cybergage Id, 
otherwise it would be better to use another one ( I used Cybergarage 
currently in the POM thinking to a "private" repository  ?safehaus? ).
BTW Stefano has created  M2 repository on Domoware (copying rawly the 
safehaus structure ) and I propose to use it temporarily. If Felix needs 
another alternative M2 repository I should submit an official request to 
the Institute, let me know if this can help I'm glad to proceed. The 
repository should work, but I would like to avoid surprise with MVN  :) 
and I would prefer that somebody tested our build before to modify the 
trunk POM.

>> Should I also change the <scope> of Cyberlink dependency to "compile" in
>> order to embed the library or should I continue to embed it as resource?
>>     
>
> I don't understand.  Do you mean embedding the library jar inside the
> bundle jar vs. expanding the library to classes inside the bundle jar?
>
>   
it don't care, my mistake, thanks
>> Should we include the sources in the library or not?
>>     
>
> I don't typically include sources in shipping bundles.
>   
ok, people that want debug the whole Felix can use CVS, but what if 
people use only a bundle, it would be nice to have also a debug version 
(bin+src). In our case, it would be still more complicated because we 
don't maintain the sources in CVS. Usually we released a binary version, 
and a debug version of the bundle.
Now in the CVS there are both jar versions as resources, at least one 
should be filtered.

francesco


Mime
View raw message