On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 01:34:22PM -0500, Richard S. Hall wrote: > Dalibor Topic wrote: > >In terms of using a minimal OSGi environment for partitioning and > >management of class library parts, what differences would be relevant > >between R2/R3/R4? > > > > Between R2 and R3, not much...you can pretty much consider those two > equivalent. > > R4 adds some considerable differences to prior releases that may be > relevant for you, such as: > > * Package import are now allowed to specify version ranges. > * Imports and exports can specify arbitrary attributes to help > direct how resolving occurs in a simplistic way. > * Support for sharing multiple versions of the same classes at the > same time. > * Along with the above, an improved consistency model that allows an > exported package to declare "uses" relationships on its imports > (and/or with other exported packages in the same bundle) so that > the framework can make sure that a given class space doesn't see > more than one version of a given class. > * Other forms of dependencies and packaging, such as explicit bundle > dependencies (as opposed to package dependencies) and bundle > fragments (that allow a logical bundle to be delivered in multiple > physical bundles). [These features are more advanced and can be > abused.] > > These are some of the main things that I can think of off the top of my > head. At this point, Felix supports the first four bullets.
Thanks for the explanation, Richard. One last question: are the bundles/packages made for R4 loadable with R2/R3, i.e. do osgi implementations ignore attributes they don't understand, for example? cheers, dalibor topic > > I will actually be giving a presentation at ApacheCon in San Diego on > this exact topic, so if anyone is interested in more details, please > stop by and listen. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask me. > > -> richard
