I was ruminating about this as well-- I agree its not exact; however, is
there any real impact? The bundle version is indicated by the
SNAPSHOT. How would the package export having the .SNAPSHOT qualifier
(which would not impact any wiring) have any undesirable impact?
On 4/5/16 4:48 PM, Raul Kripalani wrote:
I quoted the wrong part of your email, but the point still stands.
With regards to the package exports, we do need to preserve the indication
that the module is a snapshot. Otherwise the resulting export is
indistinguishable from the final version IMHO.
Cheers,
*Raúl Kripalani*
PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and
Messaging Engineer
http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
Blog: raul.io
<http://raul.io/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=apache> |
twitter: @raulvk <https://twitter.com/raulvk>
On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 10:45 PM, Raul Kripalani <ra...@apache.org> wrote:
On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Quinn Stevenson <
qu...@pronoia-solutions.com> wrote:
Do we need to keep the “.SNAPSHOT” in the exported package versions?
Does the bnd-maven-plugin feed back the calculated version into the build,
perhaps as a property? We need to inject the correct version number
downstream in the Karaf features repository (features.xml) for all Camel
bundles.
Other than that, I'm pretty sure there are other places where the actual
OSGi version number is needed. I just can't think of them now.
Cheers,
*Raúl Kripalani*
PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and
Messaging Engineer
http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
Blog: raul.io
<http://raul.io/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=apache> |
twitter: @raulvk <https://twitter.com/raulvk>
