Couple of things to try * Specify the packages versions via package-info * Inline the classes instead of embedding the jars
This would enable maven-bundle-plugin to see required package-info.java file for versions and also the SCR generated files. Also can you share your project say on github. Would be easier for me to try some options Chetan Mehrotra On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Tommaso Teofili <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com> wrote: > update on this: > I've tried the oak-fulltext approach and I found two issues: > 1. exported packages with semantic versioning from oak-lucene and oak-solr > get lost when packing everything together unless they're explicitly > specified (by hand) in the oak-fulltext maven-bundle-plugin configuration, > it can be done but can be tedious (and it's error prone) > 2. OSGi services exported by oak-lucene and oak-solr don't get exported by > oak-fulltext as maven-scr-plugin can look into src/main/java or classes but > don't know if / how it could work with embedded jars. > > Any suggestions? > Regards, > Tommaso > > > > 2014-03-11 9:00 GMT+01:00 Tommaso Teofili <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com>: > >> if there're no other objections / comments I'll go with the last suggested >> approach of having oak-lucene and oak-solr not embedding anything and >> having the oak-fulltext bundle embedding everything needed to make Lucene >> and Solr indexers working in OSGi (lucene-*, oak-lucene, solr-*, >> oak-solr-*, etc.) until we (eventually) get to proper semantic versioning >> in Lucene / Solr. >> >> As a side effect I don't think it would make sense to keep >> oak-solr-embedded and oak-solr-remote as separate artifacts so I'd merge >> them with oak-solr-core in one oak-solr bundle. >> >> Regards, >> Tommaso >> >> >> 2014-03-10 18:18 GMT+01:00 Tommaso Teofili <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com>: >> >> ah ok, thanks for clarifying. >>> Regards, >>> Tommaso >>> >>> >>> 2014-03-10 18:10 GMT+01:00 Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitt...@gmail.com>: >>> >>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Tommaso Teofili >>>> <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> > ok, so (in OSGi env) we would have oak-solr and oak-fulltext as >>>> fragments >>>> > of oak-lucene (being the fragment host) >>>> >>>> No, that's not what I meant. The proposed oak-fulltext bundle would >>>> contain all of oak-lucene, oak-solr, and the Lucene/Solr dependencies. >>>> No need for fragment bundles in this case. >>>> >>>> BR, >>>> >>>> Jukka Zitting >>>> >>> >>> >>
