[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-6034?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16750728#comment-16750728
]
Guillaume Nodet commented on FELIX-6034:
----------------------------------------
Right, but the other questions remain. What's the purpose of this requirement
if no one is using it ? I don't see the need for this additional and very
specific requirement. In addition to not break compatibility, they should be
semantically correct.
In the case of gogo, the jline and shell bundles to require the runtime, but
that should actually be specified using a service requirement on the
{{CommandProcessor}} which is missing. In a similar way, the commands to
require a shell, but the shell does not require the command bundle.
Those bi-directional links are way too strict and do not represent the reality,
just a possible deployment option.
If you keep the uni-directional link, then, if you want to resolve the command
bundle, you'll end up with the shell and the runtime, which is fine. But if
you want the runtime and use it in a different way, you should not be tied to
the other parts of gogo.
> Gogo JLine requirement doesn't allow to embed gogo.jline
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FELIX-6034
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-6034
> Project: Felix
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Gogo JLine
> Affects Versions: gogo.jline-1.1.2
> Reporter: Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> Assignee: Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: gogo.jline-1.1.3
>
>
> Felix Gogo Jline 1.1.2 introduced a Requirement:
> {code}
> @Requirement(
> effective = "active",
> namespace = "org.apache.felix.gogo",
> name = "command.implementation",
> version = "1.0.0"
> )
> {code}
> This requirement is a contract to find concrete command. However, in the case
> of Gogo JLine embedded as a standalone bundle, waiting for commands
> implementation (later on), this requirement doesn't allow to start. That's
> the case in Apache Karaf shell.
> [~rotty3000] do you mind if I remove this requirement (as I did other fixes
> like in {{Posix}} commands) ? We could add this Requirement in gogo.jline 2.x
> and then, I will have to find a bypass or at least a fake command providing a
> capability.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
