> I'll play with the build for a while Not sure if the instructions are up to date, but what I do for a build at the moment is:
git clone go into the build module copy sample.local.properties as local.properties configure local.properties with the version IDs I want ant I think due to a javadoc quirk I have to run that build on Java6 and not 7. This produces the aj-build folder (as a peer of build) containing a distro and all the jars. cheers, Andy On 21 January 2013 14:27, Andy Clement <andrew.clem...@gmail.com> wrote: > From your background description on the projects, BND seems a good choice. > I don't really have a strong preference. > > cheers, > Andy > > > On 18 January 2013 05:42, M. P. <free...@abv.bg> wrote: > >> I'm asking because SpringSource Bundlor has been discontinued. The >> current stuff has been moved to Virgo and will not be a separate package as >> far as I understand. >> http://www.springsource.org/bundlor >> On the other hand BND is not going away any time soon, plus I think it >> has a bigger community. I have some experience with BND and I know it can >> generate "uses" directives which are not easy to add manually. >> Of course it is up to you. AspectJ's bundles are simple enough so it >> doesn't really matter which tool is used. >> I'd like to ask you to make this decision then I'll play with the build >> for a while and will get back to you with either a patch or questions :) >> >> Regards >> M >> >> >> > Hi, >> > My preference for bundlor was only because I knew the team that >> wrote it and could hassle them directly with questions :) but really >> whatever works is fine. >> > There was a nightly build (cruisecontrol driven) running on the >> eclipse servers but since we moved from CVS to GIT last year it hasn't been >> resurrected - another thing on my todo list ! Right now I tend to do adhoc >> dev builds now and again and upload them, in between the full releases (a >> 1.7.2 release isn't too far away, it'd be great to get the OSGi manifests >> done for that). >> > cheers, >> > Andy >> >> > On 15 January 2013 23:34, M. P. >> >> > wrote: >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Great. >> >> > So as far as I understand you prefer Bundlor over BND? >> >> > Now that you mention the build process, is there a periodic build >> running? >> >> > >> >> > Thank you. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > Yep, that is ok with me and ideally what I'd like to do. My >> hesitancy about it is just because I am aware that the build process is not >> a fun place to work at the moment so it may not be as straightforward as >> you imagine... >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > Andy >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > On 15 January 2013 02:59, M. P. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > Looks like this is a slight misunderstanding. >> >> > >> >> > > I meant to use BND or Bundlor in the build script to >> generate the manifest every time. And test the resulting OSGi bundle in a >> real OSGi runtime just once (manually, before this is committed). >> >> > >> >> > > Is that OK with you? >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > Thank you. >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > Hi, >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > I'd be ok with a one time manual test to verify >> it is basically correct. I previously used bundlor but was not in a >> position to verify the output so I never committed it. Ideally I wanted to >> integrate bundlor invocation into the build process so that when >> occasionally a new package is added or one deleted, the manifest stays in >> step. Rather than just run bundlor once and commit those fixed manifests. >> However, if a 'one off run' is simplest then I'd be ok to use it for >> aspectjrt.jar as the package set for that hardly ever changes. >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > cheers, >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > Andy >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > On 11 January 2013 11:11, M. P. >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > I'd assume they have an environment in >> which to verify the correctness of what is being created. >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > Do mean an automatic test suite or one-time >> manual testing? >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > Automatic tests would be very nice but they >> would require serious machinery such as the OSGi runtime. >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > And maybe these bundles (aspectrt, weaver, >> etc) are simple enough so that it is safe to assume that tools such as BND >> and Bundlor generate valid manifests? >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > What do you think? >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > Thanks. >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > The weaver also needs one (and I >> suppose it does no harm to get it right for tools and matcher too). >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > This has long been on the list of >> TODOs (see bugs like >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=338034) - I even >> prototyped the implementation with bundlor ( >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > http://www.springsource.org/bundlor). I created some basic >> versions for testing but I don't believe the users got back to me about >> whether what was being generated was correct. Traditionally users just >> seemed to go the EBR and collect the versions from there which had had >> their manifests regenerated. I'd be happy for someone to take this on and >> sort it out properly for AspectJ, I'm more than happy to help them progress >> it - I'd assume they have an environment in which to verify the correctness >> of what is being created. >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > The AspectJ build process is a bit >> arcane, which can make something you'd think would be easy, rather tricky, >> but I'll help a brave soul battle through that. >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > cheers, >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > Andy >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > On 10 January 2013 06:51, M. P. >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> The aspectjrt.jar does not have a >> valid OSGi manifest at the moemnt. It would be nice if it did. >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> In order to make it OSGi >> compliant the manifest should get a few more headers such as Export-Package. >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> I saw that the aspectjrt.jar >> manifest is generated from this file >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> http://git.eclipse.org/c/aspectj/org.aspectj.git/tree/aspectj5rt/aspectj5rt.mf.txt >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> Since the packages listed in >> Export-Package should have versions adding this header to the manifest >> template is problemat because when the version placeholders are replaced >> with the real values the format of the manifest may become invalid. >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> So how do you feel about >> generating the manifest in the build script via >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > http://ant.apache.org/manual/Tasks/manifest.html? >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> Thanks. >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> aspectj-users mailing list >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > aspectj-users@eclipse.org >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> _______________________________________________ >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > aspectj-users mailing list >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > aspectj-users@eclipse.org >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > _______________________________________________ >> >> > >> >> > > aspectj-users mailing list >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > aspectj-users@eclipse.org >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > aspectj-users mailing list >> >> > >> >> > aspectj-users@eclipse.org >> >> > >> >> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> aspectj-users mailing list >> aspectj-users@eclipse.org >> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users >> > >
_______________________________________________ aspectj-users mailing list aspectj-users@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
