Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6809200B44 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2016 18:04:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id E5837160A63; Thu, 14 Jul 2016 16:04:10 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 3AD95160A60 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2016 18:04:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 1799 invoked by uid 500); 14 Jul 2016 16:04:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@felix.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@felix.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@felix.apache.org Received: (qmail 1788 invoked by uid 99); 14 Jul 2016 16:04:09 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 14 Jul 2016 16:04:09 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id AC812C2D72 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2016 16:04:08 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd1-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.28 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.28 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY=1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd1-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.7]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id d8dWb8zp8OO2 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2016 16:04:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay2-d.mail.gandi.net (relay2-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.194]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 3237660D23 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2016 16:04:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mfilter27-d.gandi.net (mfilter27-d.gandi.net [217.70.178.155]) by relay2-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3334C5A68 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2016 18:04:05 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mfilter27-d.gandi.net Received: from relay2-d.mail.gandi.net ([IPv6:::ffff:217.70.183.194]) by mfilter27-d.gandi.net (mfilter27-d.gandi.net [::ffff:10.0.15.180]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t8dekPt9n0vX for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2016 18:04:04 +0200 (CEST) X-Originating-IP: 78.244.148.153 Received: from [192.168.134.6] (ser34-1-78-244-148-153.fbx.proxad.net [78.244.148.153]) (Authenticated sender: jb@nanthrax.net) by relay2-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 03964C5A4F for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2016 18:04:03 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: [Discuss] Providing typical felix dependencies as a pom To: dev@felix.apache.org References: <57861182.2010300@die-schneider.net> <57872542.4010107@nanthrax.net> <5787524B.9010809@die-schneider.net> <57877DC2.5010800@nanthrax.net> <57878A64.5040301@die-schneider.net> <57878AB6.4060506@nanthrax.net> <57878BB1.1000005@die-schneider.net> <57878C77.9020604@nanthrax.net> <57878DCF.7000604@die-schneider.net> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jean-Baptiste_Onofr=c3=a9?= Message-ID: <5787B7F2.20102@nanthrax.net> Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 18:04:02 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit archived-at: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 16:04:11 -0000 That's also my point: as Felix provides atomic projects, it's so useful for Felix itself. That's why it makes more sense in Karaf as it already "packages" different Felix projects all together. My $0.01. Regards JB On 07/14/2016 03:40 PM, Carsten Ziegeler wrote: > Maybe we should ask who would really actually use this? > > I'm not saying it is not useful, but still I would like to know if there > is some existing interest > > Regards > Carsten > >> Yes. That is the reason why I propose to adapt and release the bom about >> every 6 months to catch up with the changes. >> Of course we can choose any time interval. >> >> I would volunteer to provide the initial pom and also do the regular >> updates if no one else does it. >> >> Christian >> >> On 14.07.2016 14:58, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: >>> >>> I'm still puzzled where to define such BoM. >>> In Karaf, we already do the validation of the versions all together >>> (that's one of the Karaf purpose). So, it's the most straight forward >>> way. >>> In Felix, as we provide each dependency individually, we have to >>> remember to update and provide the BoM. >>> >>> Regards >>> JB >>> >>> >> >> > > > > -- Jean-Baptiste Onofré jbonofre@apache.org http://blog.nanthrax.net Talend - http://www.talend.com