On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 9:25 PM, Marcel Offermans <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Dave, > > On May 8, 2009, at 10:33 , David Savage wrote: > >> Couple of comments inline but in general I get the impression there is >> interest in taking this further? > > Yes, so far I've only seen positive responses! > >> I'll assume yes and start work to >> make a partially cleaned up branch available as an issue. I say >> partially as I can easilly remove the runtime integration as it is a >> stand alone module and it is the only part that depends explicitly on >> newton. If sigil gets accepted we can think about how best to replace >> this for general osgi runtimes. I may remove the SCA bit now - but >> won't go overboard as this is a bit more entangled vs being it's own >> module (we can tidy this up in the medium term should it be an issue). > > Ok. > >>>>>> - Version Policies [...] >>> >>> I've been talking with a couple of people who are doing more research >>> into >>> the automated versioning of OSGi bundles, doing all kinds of bytecode >>> analysis to determine the scope of changes. Again, for the longer term it >>> would be nice if tools like these could be integrated (if only to >>> validate >>> if the version numbers you stuck on your packages and bundles are >>> correct, >>> based on the policy you use). >> >> As I say I know the PDE guys have done something already in this area >> - perhaps if we can convince them to make it into a stand alone >> library would save some reinvention... > > Yes, they have a system that does this, but some of the research I'm talking > about takes this some steps further. Oh well, that's probably something > worth discussing in the future. > >> can apache projects link to >> eclipse licenced projects? > > As far as I know, yes.
Yes, linking is ok. regards, Karl > Greetings, Marcel > > -- Karl Pauls [email protected]
