ature
> > > repositories because if I aggregate, then it takes longer to
> > create the
> > > updated aggregate feature xml.
> > >
> > > Ryan
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jun 15, 2019, 12:01 P
t; > needed for that scenario. Otherwise I need to rethink how I
> > handle the
> > > requirement and capabilities. I am trying to keep separate
> feature
> > > repositories because if I aggregate, then it takes longer to
> >
> > > requirement and capabilities. I am trying to keep separate feature
> > > repositories because if I aggregate, then it takes longer to
> > create the
> > > updated aggregate feature xml.
> > >
> > > Ryan
> > >
1 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>
> > <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ryan,
> >
> > I will provide a more complete answer (I don't have tim
> you can take a look on the way we use cap/req in Pax Web (for the
> HTTP
> > provider capability).
> >
> > Basically, the cap/req are global in the feature resolver,
> considering
> > the req/cap at feature level, but also at bundle level.
>
JB
>
> On 15/06/2019 16:28, Ryan Moquin wrote:
> > I apologize if this is a stupid question. I've been trying to
> understand
> > how to leverage capabilities and requirements in a way to allow
> defining
> > the provisioning of a system by sp
On 15/06/2019 16:28, Ryan Moquin wrote:
> > I apologize if this is a stupid question. I've been trying to understand
> > how to leverage capabilities and requirements in a way to allow defining
> > the provisioning of a system by specifying requirements in a feature.
> >
>
also at bundle level.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 15/06/2019 16:28, Ryan Moquin wrote:
> > I apologize if this is a stupid question. I've been trying to understand
> > how to leverage capabilities and requirements in a way to allow defining
> > the provisioning of a s
undle level.
Regards
JB
On 15/06/2019 16:28, Ryan Moquin wrote:
> I apologize if this is a stupid question. I've been trying to understand
> how to leverage capabilities and requirements in a way to allow defining
> the provisioning of a system by specifying requirements in a feat
I apologize if this is a stupid question. I've been trying to understand
how to leverage capabilities and requirements in a way to allow defining
the provisioning of a system by specifying requirements in a feature.
I've read through the posts on the mailing list about it, the docs and
10 matches
Mail list logo
