geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ivan <>
Subject Re: Keep the same convention of import/export packages
Date Thu, 03 Dec 2009 09:24:51 GMT
Acutally both the styles are comfortable to me. So, let's always
import/export owned packages, maybe we would never encounter the
backward-compatiblity issue :-)

2009/12/3 David Jencks <>

> On Dec 2, 2009, at 7:29 PM, Ivan wrote:
>  Hi,
>>    Currently, Geronimo uses many third-parties bundles (like pubished by
>> ServiceMix), also publishes some bundles by our own. So, whether importing
>> and exporting the packages at the same time, I think we need to have a same
>> convention. I checked the bundles published by ServiceMix, for those tool
>> components, like commons-*, they do not import their own packages. I also
>> found those bundles published by Felix always import those packages.
>>  Generally specaking, it is hard to say which one is better. So, for
>> Geronimo, personally, I prefered the way of ServiceMix, which does not
>> import those packages at the same time for those tool-like components.
>>    Any comment ?
> I've had some discussions with Guillaume about this.  There are some
> circumstances where having 2 versions of a jar, importing what you export,
> and loading the jars in the wrong order can cause problems.  This is why
> Guillaume has adopted the servicemix approach.
> I think this is wrong and that such problems should be avoided by package
> versioning and scoping or bundle isolation.  I don't think rfc 138 is going
> to provide a very usable solution but it is likely to be the best we can
> come up with at this point.
> Anyway I think we should follow everyone else's advice and import what we
> export.  It is really only crucial when a bundle registers some services but
> I think it is still good practice.
> thanks
> david jencks
>  --
>> Ivan


View raw message