Mailing-List: contact user-help@karaf.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@karaf.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <55C22BAF.2000707@nanthrax.net>
References: 
 <CAF8t5XuQcnSdsfnoiJNyS0RpPKTgrujLZ-nzzL0CGmRJi+hXRg@mail.gmail.com>
	<55C22BAF.2000707@nanthrax.net>
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 19:12:41 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <CAF8t5XtbMnMKoqNxRpApGw-FdcGZSuhnsgJsF3ajDJdAaz1d_Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: How to avoid getting two servicemix-specs versions when
 installing camel or cxf 's feature
From: Aki Yoshida <elakito@gmail.com>
To: user@karaf.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi JB,

Thanks for the explanation.

For the current snapshot version of camel (2.16-SNAPSHOT and
2.15.3-SNAPSHOT), we used approach 1 to solve this problem for now.
If the spec features are made available in one of the Karaf's repos as
in approach 2, that will be great. This can avoid this problem for
other combination in the future or with a combination with other
components that also can use this shared features to avoid getting
into this problem.
Will you be providing the spec features as in approach 2?

Regards, aki


2015-08-05 17:28 GMT+02:00 Jean-Baptiste Onofr=C3=A9 <jb@nanthrax.net>:
> Hi Aki,
>
> We have different ways:
> 1/ we "align" CXF and Camel to the same spec bundle version. As spec bund=
les
> are pretty stable in term of release, I think it's probably the easiest
> move, but we don't actually fix the problem if we use old version of one =
of
> the two.
> 2/ remove spec from CXF and Camel and put a spec feature directly in Kara=
f,
> as we do for jetty, etc.
> 3/ provision spec bundle in the lib folder as we do for activator spec
> bundle
>
> Probably 2 would make sense. Anyway, we will have to update CXF and Camel=
 to
> refer to provided spec feature. With Karaf 4 and the new feature resolver=
,
> it would be better to use feature requirements and let the resolver deals
> with spec bundle.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On 08/05/2015 11:38 AM, Aki Yoshida wrote:
>>
>> Originally, I posted the following mail to dev@camel regarding this issu=
e.
>>
>> http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Installing-camel-cxf-2-15-2-feature-le=
ads-to-two-versions-of-ServiceMix-Stax-API-bundles-installed-td5769830.html
>>
>> Currently, both camel and cxf have their features that directly
>> installing some servicemix-specs bundles. This leads to the problem
>> mentioned in the above mail thread that installing camel-cxf leads to
>> installing two versions of servicemix-spec because camel-2.15.2 is
>> using smx-specs 2.2.0 while cxf-3.0.4 referred in camel-2.15.2 is
>> using smx-specs 2.4.0.
>>
>> I am wondering if we need to define this feature (e.g., feature
>> stax-api-1.0) outside of camel and cxf and both refer to this external
>> feature using the appropriate version range e.g. [2.2,3) or we can
>> locally solve this problem within camel and cxf's feature definitions?
>>
>> I would appreciate for your comments.
>>
>> regards, aki
>>
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofr=C3=A9
> jbonofre@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com