I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-8100 and marked
it as a blocker for the next release
Regards
Carsten
Am 13.11.2018 um 08:02 schrieb Carsten Ziegeler:
Am 09.11.2018 um 14:23 schrieb Robert Munteanu:
On Fri, 2018-11-09 at 13:49 +0100, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
- what
Am 09.11.2018 um 14:23 schrieb Robert Munteanu:
On Fri, 2018-11-09 at 13:49 +0100, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
- what exactly does complete imply? can it be launched with other
features? etc. I guess we just need to define this.
My personal optinion is that we should be able to launch a
On Fri, 2018-11-09 at 13:49 +0100, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> - what exactly does complete imply? can it be launched with other
> features? etc. I guess we just need to define this.
My personal optinion is that we should be able to launch a complete
feature with other features. One scenario which
On Fri, 2018-11-09 at 13:12 +, David Bosschaert wrote:
> FWIW the current description of features vs 'complete features' in
> the OSGi
> RFP can be found in section 2.4 of [1].
>
> @Robert Munteanu pretty much what you described
> :)
Ah OK. I should've read that first :-)
Thanks,
Robert
FWIW the current description of features vs 'complete features' in the OSGi
RFP can be found in section 2.4 of [1].
@Robert Munteanu pretty much what you described :)
Best regards,
David
[1] https://github.com/osgi/design/blob/master/rfps/rfp-0188-Features.pdf
On Fri, 9 Nov 2018 at 12:49,
We had a similar discussion in the OSGi expert group about this and
basically came to a similar conclusion.
Now, in the first version of our code base in Sling we distinguished
between a feature and an application, where an application was a
complete feature. We dropped the application
Hi,
I am wondering if it makes sense to mark a feature as 'complete'. A
complete feature would be one that is expected to be launched
individually, e.g. needs to additions to function.
I would see the benefits mainly in tooling:
- a complete feature is self-contained, therefore all requirements
