[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [buckminster-dev] A few general questions about Buckminster
|
I promise to use the news group once this thread is dead!!
Hello Phil,
Thanks for your input.
As you know "Require-Bundle" in an OSGi manifest is frowned upon in the
OSGi community. We do use "Import-Package" but I am now questioning why
bother since we have to specify it's bundle dependencies in a POM or CSPEC
So if I use "Require-Bundle" in the bundle manifest that should be
sufficient for buckminster to resolve my dependencies without the need
to maintain a "feature" CSPEC.
However it does mean by using Require-Bundle I am tying my bundle at
runtime to another specific bundle. Another bundle with a different
symbolic name could provide the required packages but would not be
picked up. I am in two minds at the moment what to do.
I think you have convinced me to create multiple feature projects like
you say.
We are also trying to use semantic versioning so developers need not
have to worry about compatibility between bundles. Enforcing it is the
hard bit but eclipse does offer support in this area (enable API analysis)
In an ideal world I want to grab a feature project from CVS and then use
Buckminster to materialize the relevant bundles in my workspace, as well
as a target platform and if possible the current baseline of the feature
to work against to enforce semantic versioning, a question I will ask on
the newsgroup shortly.
Thanks
On 21/04/2011 17:00, Phil Borlin wrote:
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Thomas Hallgren<thomas@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2011-04-21 10:48, Paul French wrote:
How could it do this if the bundle manifest only contains Import-Package
directives? Does it require a Require-Bundle
directive instead to be able to resolve other bundle dependencies?
The approach that I'd recommend is to use a feature at the top that describes your "product"
or "installable". In this feature, you list all bundles that cannot be
resolved by other means.
I work on a fairly large OSGi application that builds with Buckminster
and I want to second the "put it in a feature" approach. We don't use
a "top" feature but manage this throughout our applications. So for
instance we may have a MarketingFeature and a AccountingFeature. We
use imported packages as much as possible and manage the specific
bundle versions in the appropriate feature. This way the team that is
working on the MarketingFeature specifies their bundle versions in
their feature and the team working on the AccountingFeature specifies
their bundle versions in their feature. This prevents us from having
one giant feature or product file that everyone in the company is just
adding bundles to.
-Phil
_______________________________________________
buckminster-dev mailing list
buckminster-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/buckminster-dev
