On 02/22/2013 05:50 PM, Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > > 2013/2/22 Thomas Neidhart <thomas.neidh...@gmail.com> > >> On 02/22/2013 05:35 PM, Thomas Neidhart wrote: >>> On 02/22/2013 05:09 PM, Thomas Neidhart wrote: >>>> On 02/20/2013 09:48 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote: >>>>> Hi Thomas, >>>>> >>>>> Thomas Neidhart wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 02/20/2013 09:33 PM, Oliver Heger wrote: >>>>>>> Am 20.02.2013 16:42, schrieb t...@apache.org: >>>>>>>> Author: tn >>>>>>>> Date: Wed Feb 20 15:42:09 2013 >>>>>>>> New Revision: 1448251 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1448251 >>>>>>>> Log: >>>>>>>> Update version info >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Modified: >>>>>>>> commons/proper/logging/trunk/src/conf/MANIFEST.MF >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Modified: commons/proper/logging/trunk/src/conf/MANIFEST.MF >>>>>>>> URL: >>>>>>>> >>>>> >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/logging/trunk/src/conf/MANIFEST.MF?rev=1448251&r1=1448250&r2=1448251&view=diff >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >> ============================================================================== >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --- commons/proper/logging/trunk/src/conf/MANIFEST.MF (original) >>>>>>>> +++ commons/proper/logging/trunk/src/conf/MANIFEST.MF Wed Feb 20 >>>>>>>> 15:42:09 2013 >>>>>>>> @@ -5,4 +5,4 @@ Specification-Version: 1.0 >>>>>>>> Implementation-Title: Commons Logging >>>>>>>> Implementation-Vendor-Id: org.apache >>>>>>>> Implementation-Vendor: Apache Software Foundation >>>>>>>> -Implementation-Version: 1.1.1 >>>>>>>> +Implementation-Version: 1.1.2 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Just wondering whether this is necessary. Doesn't the maven build >>>>>>> automatically generate a fully configured MANIFEST including OSGi >> meta >>>>>>> data? >>>>> >>>>> wondered about exactly the same. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> yes, but somehow the ant build script is still in use (e.g. for gump) >>>>>> and both ant & maven refer to this hard-coded manifest. >>>>> >>>>> If Gump uses Ant here, this is just for historical reasons. Gump can >> use >>>>> Maven since quite some time now. >>>> >>>> Ok, when I try to remove the hard-coded manifest, the >>>> maven-bundle-plugin steps in and automatically creates one. >>>> >>>> This is fine, but the Import-Package contains all (optional) >>>> dependencies which are not marked like that. >>>> >>>> I am not so familiar with these things, does somebody know how to >>>> specify this? >>>> >>>> Or would this not work at all, as already outlined in LOGGING-124? >>> >>> After some research, I started with this: >>> >>> <plugin> >>> <groupId>org.apache.felix</groupId> >>> <artifactId>maven-bundle-plugin</artifactId> >>> <inherited>true</inherited> >>> <configuration> >>> <instructions> >>> <Import-Package>*;resolution:=optional</Import-Package> >>> <DynamicImport-Package>*</DynamicImport-Package> >>> </instructions> >>> </configuration> >>> </plugin> >>> >>> All dependencies are optional, so this should be fine. >>> I added the DynamicImport but this may be to generic, and has to be >>> limited to the actual packages that are loaded dynamically by the >>> discovery process. >>> >>> Can anybody provide me with a simple test bundle to see if logging would >>> work when loaded in e.g. apache felix? >> >> Well, I have not yet a clue about osgi, and I see that felix has >> re-bundled commons-logging in a total different way: >> >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/commons/commons-logging/pom.xml > > > I have some experience with osgi (although I'm no expert either ;-). I can > have a look tonight when I'm at home. We can also ask the felix ML. They > have been supportive with OSGi meta data.
ok thanks, another thing I have found as comment in LOGGING-124: Spring seems to rebundle commons-logging with proper meta data. see http://www.springsource.com/repository/app/bundle/version/detail?name=com.springsource.org.apache.commons.logging&version=1.1.1&searchType=bundlesByName&searchQuery=logging Using these settings from their manifest into our pom: <commons.osgi.import> javax.servlet;version="[2.1.0, 3.0.0)";resolution:=optional, org.apache.avalon.framework.logger;version="[4.1.3, 4.1.5]";resolution:=optional, org.apache.log;version="[1.0.1, 1.0.1]";resolution:=optional, org.apache.log4j;version="[1.2.15, 2.0.0)";resolution:=optional </commons.osgi.import> Does anybody have experience with using this spring bundle and whether this works? Reading all theses (negative) threads about osgi and commons-logging makes me wonder if this is really still valid with version 1.1+? Lots of things have changed, and there are several bundles of commons-logging from other sources (spring, felix), so I guess it will work? Thomas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
