On 8/27/05, Richard S. Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For me, this was more an issue of letting things settle down a little > bit. Everything is so fluid right now that it seems like we'd be chasing > our tails.
Definitely a good idea, but I'd also avoid letting anything settle down which is known to be somiething you want to change as things can pick up fast and they get harder and harder to change. > You have to expect dependencies from felix.jar to osgi.jar. The reverse > dependencies are a little more tricky and ugly. The ugly part is that I > just grabbed the R4 sources from Eclipse since they are under EPL so > that we would have them to compile against until the official R4 release > comes out which will also be under EPL; Eclipse has dependencies back > into their framework, so I just hacked them to get them to compile with > Felix. The tricky part is that we will probably want these circular > dependencies too, because this is done for optimization purposes. I don't think this is an issue of Mavenization, as I think it needs to be addressed in the Ant build anyway (and you can get Maven to do what you are doing now with a little encouragement, but it isn't recommended). So, if osgi.jar and felix.jar are going to forever be linked in this way, they have to reside together and you can't substitute another container for felix or another osgi spec jar without changing the other. In which case, they should just be one JAR. Problem solved :) This cuts back to how the R4 sources will be managed going forward, which I've discussed with you before. Will we be maintaining our own version of the R4 sources, constantly copying changes from the EPL sources, will they be frozen, or will we eventually use a redistributable JAR? I think from earlier discussions we've established that all of those are acceptable from a licensing standpoint, but from a technical standpoint the first one sounds downright scary, the second reasonable (but still scary as I'm sure there will be revisions and then it reverts to the first) and third preferable as it means that osgi.jar and felix.jar can be independant. Regardless, IMO if we maintain the sources and there is a circular dep, I think producing one JAR is the best way to go. WDYT? - Brett
