Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] How to spec EE for "resource only" bundle

[John Arthorne <John_Arthorne@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I suggest entering an enhancement in
Equinox Framework. Someone who knows the OSGi spec better than I will be
able to comment on whether there is a spec-friendly way to achieve this.

John

David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

28/05/2007 11:30 AM

Please respond to
Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

To	Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject	Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] How to spec EE for        "resource        only"        bundles?

Thanks John. 

To me, for proper tooling support and improved manifest specification,
this makes it obvious there should be the ability to 
list something like the following in your manifest.mf file ... Its is always
best to be explicit where "none" is specified implicitly :) 
Especially since it's absence can mean "default EE" as well.
Bundle-RequiredExecutionEnvironment: NONE 

Where is the correct place to enter such a feature request? It seems the
OSGi spec does not prohibit it, exactly, though I've only skimmed it. 
It does say, basically, "you can define what ever profiles you want".

So would this be an OSGi feature request? Or, an Eclipse feature request?

Thanks,

John Arthorne <John_Arthorne@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

05/28/2007 10:24 AM

Please respond to
Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

To	Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject	Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] How to spec EE for "resource        only"        bundles?

I suggest omitting the Bundle-RequiredExecutionEnvironment header for a
bundle that does not have any dependency on Java. This follows the general
rule of thumb of keeping your dependencies as small as possible. I don't
think we can really say what the lowest possible EE is - someone could
always come along in the future with a smaller EE than those we have today.
It certainly does matter what you do for these bundles, since OSGi will
not resolve the bundle if its EE requirement is not satisfied at runtime.
An overly restrictive EE header will prevent a bundle from resolving for
no good reason. Unfortunately, that doesn't really help you with the problem
of tracking down bundles that really do have a Java dependency but are
missing the EE header. 

John

David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

28/05/2007 01:55 AM

Please respond to
Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

To	cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
cc
Subject	[cross-project-issues-dev] How to spec EE for "resource only"        bundles?

I'm thinking of bundles that don't contain any Java code ... such as doc
plugins, infopop (help) bundles, source? 

I'm assuming it basically doesn't matter? So, should it be "lowest"
possible EE? Or, should it be none? Is it even "used" by runtime
for these types of bundles, or can it tell that they are "resource
only" bundles? 

Besides "getting it right", I'm also trying to think of easy
way to find bundles that should have one specified, but don't. 

Any advise? 

BTW, I have noticed at least one doc bundle that specified J2SE-1.5, and
wonder if this was running on an "info server", that was running
a JRE 1.4 server if it would be cause that doc from being available? 
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev