Hi Oliver one more comment :-)
On Jun 29, 2011, at 3:57 PM, Oliver Lietz wrote:
> Am Wednesday 29 June 2011 schrieb David Jencks:
>> Hi Oliver,
>
> hi David,
>
>> maven != osgi.
>>
>> I think the document about how the bundle is intended to be used is the
>> bundle manifest. The pom is the
Am Wednesday 29 June 2011 schrieb David Jencks:
> Hi Oliver,
hi David,
> maven != osgi.
>
> I think the document about how the bundle is intended to be used is the
> bundle manifest. The pom is there to build the bundle. If you want to
> use the pom for something else, that's kind of your prob
Hi Oliver,
maven != osgi.
I think the document about how the bundle is intended to be used is the bundle
manifest. The pom is there to build the bundle. If you want to use the pom
for something else, that's kind of your problem. If you describe sufficiently
clearly how you want to use the p
Am Wednesday 29 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> The pom clearly "works" since we build the bundle correctly using it. I'm
> betting you are trying to use it in a way we didn't intend so can you
> provide information on what you are doing so we can look into it?
haha - nice one. Is there a
The pom clearly "works" since we build the bundle correctly using it. I'm
betting you are trying to use it in a way we didn't intend so can you provide
information on what you are doing so we can look into it?
Alasdair Nottingham
On 28 Jun 2011, at 23:21, Oliver Lietz wrote:
> Am Wednesday 29
Am Wednesday 29 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> Alasdair Nottingham
>
> On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:46, Oliver Lietz wrote:
> > Am Tuesday 28 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> >> Alasdair Nottingham
> >>
> >> On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:06, Oliver Lietz wrote:
> >>> Am Monday 27 June 2011 s
Alasdair Nottingham
On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:46, Oliver Lietz wrote:
> Am Tuesday 28 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
>> Alasdair Nottingham
>>
>> On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:06, Oliver Lietz wrote:
>>> Am Monday 27 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
Hi,
>>>
>>> hey,
>>>
I don't
Am Tuesday 28 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> Alasdair Nottingham
>
> On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:06, Oliver Lietz wrote:
> > Am Monday 27 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> >> Hi,
> >
> > hey,
> >
> >> I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have been more
> >> "on d
Alasdair Nottingham
On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:06, Oliver Lietz wrote:
> Am Monday 27 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
>> Hi,
>
> hey,
>
>> I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have been more
>> "on demand".
>>
>> After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundl
Am Monday 27 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> Hi,
hey,
> I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have been more
> "on demand".
>
> After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release process so
> their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were previously. S
Am 28.06.2011 17:57, schrieb Jacek Laskowski:
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Bengt Rodehav wrote:
Isn't what OSGi versioning (for bundles and packages) is supposed to
take care of?
Oh yes, the OSGi runtime will complain when there's a version mismatch...
But I'd really like to take care of
OK - I trust you guys...
Just need to know whether I need to update any of my other Aries projects
when I upgrade the JPA part. I'm also using Blueprint, JTA and JNDI (as most
others using JPA I guess). On the Aries web it looks like 0.3 is the latest
version of everything but in Maven central I c
Hi,
As pointed out OSGi versioning does help here. We have put the
infrastructure in place to do distributions which include multiple things
collected together. I'm not sure if we will do that here though. In general
the latest releases of things will have been tested together prior to
release.
A
Yeah, I guess you're right. I'm just a little sloppy when it comes to OSGi
versioning myself...
/Bengt
2011/6/28 Jacek Laskowski
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Bengt Rodehav wrote:
>
> > Now that you seem to release the sub projects independently (which I
> guess
> > is good since it enabl
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Bengt Rodehav wrote:
> Now that you seem to release the sub projects independently (which I guess
> is good since it enables more frequent releases) it is important to document
> what versions of the different sub projects are compatible with each other
> (and tha
lable it should be possible for us to
> get
> > the build into a release-able state
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Tim
> >
> >
> > Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:18:51 +
> > Subject: Re: 0.4
> > From: younes.ou...@gm
, but now that Equinox
> 3.7 and the OSGi 4.3 API are available it should be possible for us to get
> the build into a release-able state
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim
>
>
> Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:18:51 +
> Subject: Re: 0.4
> From: youne
: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:18:51 +
Subject: Re: 0.4
From: younes.ou...@gmail.com
To: user@aries.apache.org
Hello Alasdair,
I endorse the point of view of both Bengt and Harald. It will be very
interesting to release the enhancement allowing the runtime enhancer. This
feature is more 'compat
Hello Alasdair,
I endorse the point of view of both Bengt and Harald. It will be very
interesting to release the enhancement allowing the runtime enhancer. This
feature is more 'compatible' with the loose-coupling best-practice. Why
should my 'entities bundles' know about their JPA Provider?
I be
Thanks for your reply Alasdair,
Reading the documentation about the JPA support it seems like in 0.4, it is
no longer necessary to list all classes in the persistence.xml. That's an
improvement I'm really interested in which is why asked about the 0.4
release. I also use Karaf+Camel and I'm used t
Am 27.06.2011 21:01, schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
Do you need a release?
I've successfully tested OpenJPA enhancement at deployment time using
Aries 0.4-SNAPSHOT and an Equinox 3.7 release candidate. AFAIK, OSGi
weaving hooks are not yet supported in Aries 0.3.
Build time enhancement in O
Hi,
I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have been more "on
demand".
After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release process so
their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were previously. Some bundles
might be at 0.4 and some at 0.3.1.
Do you need a release?
22 matches
Mail list logo
