karaf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Guillaume Nodet <gno...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Packages exported by the system bundle
Date Thu, 08 Jul 2010 22:42:25 GMT
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 22:28, David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jul 8, 2010, at 10:02 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>> This is related to KARAF-13 but i'd like to gather feedback and come
>> up with a consensus.
>> Until now, the approach for packages exported by the system bundle was
>> to use a lower denominator from JDK 1.5 with a slight change for the
>> javax.transaction package to make sure it works on JEE.   The rational
>> was that users could deploy additional bundles to get the desired
>> features (such as stax, jaxws etc...).
>> Now, from a pure usability pov, it sounds natural that a user can use
>> the full JRE.
>> So I wonder if we should change the default behavior to export all the
>> JRE packages, and let downstream embedders (ServiceMix, Geronimo and
>> other projects) tweak the settings to suit their needs.
>> Thoughts ?
> I think that enough users may want upgraded versions of the specs included in java 1.6
that it would be better not to expose the copies in the jdk by default.  This might be driven
by geronimo :-)
> I guess I think its easier to add in something that's hidden that try to figure out why,
when you include one spec version explicitly, you get another.

We had the exact same problems in ServiceMix, using a lot of the JEE
specs that leverage the META-INF/services discovery mechanism.  We had
to enhance a lot of this specs to make sure they work well.   But
we've had several requests from users asking why some packages aren't

> If the java spec version <> osgi package version debate ever progresses this might
become moot as we would expose what's in the jdk at  a known version level.

That does not solve the discovery problem though ....

> Is there any way to use flags or configuration or something so you can say, for base
java 1.6, "i want annotation 1.0" (and no other built-in obsolete specs).

What i've done today is extract all the exported packages in a
different config file so that it's easier for users to modify at will.
 We can keep the packages commented or something like that, but i'm
not sure that's what you really suggest.

> thanks
> david jencks
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Guillaume Nodet
>> ------------------------
>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>> ------------------------
>> Open Source SOA
>> http://fusesource.com

Guillaume Nodet
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
Open Source SOA

View raw message