Well, they call it age :-) It gets even worse after you get children ...
Kind regards,
Peter Kriens
On 30 sep 2008, at 18:48, Richard S. Hall wrote:
Well, I definitely don't remember talking about these, but I agree
that the filter is currently insufficient to handle these issues.
Well, I definitely don't remember talking about these, but I agree that
the filter is currently insufficient to handle these issues.
-> richard
Peter Kriens wrote:
They are definitely in RFC 112 ... and it has your name on it :-)
From RFC 112:
5.6 Filter Extensions
The OSGi filter language
They are definitely in RFC 112 ... and it has your name on it :-)
From RFC 112:
5.6 Filter Extensions
The OSGi filter language is based on LDAP. For this specification, the
filter is extended with new capabilities.
5.6.1 Greater and Less Operators
The filter supports now all comparison opera
Richard S. Hall wrote:
Peter Kriens wrote:
Well, if Felix's OBR uses its framework filter it needs to create its
own filter. You can not reuse the framework filter ... This is not a
big deal.
Well, we'd gladly take a contribution in this area. :-)
Seriously, though, Peter, I don't remember
Peter Kriens wrote:
Well, if Felix's OBR uses its framework filter it needs to create its
own filter. You can not reuse the framework filter ... This is not a
big deal.
Well, we'd gladly take a contribution in this area. :-)
-> richard
Kind regards,
Peter Kriens
On 30 sep 2008, at 1
Well, if Felix's OBR uses its framework filter it needs to create its
own filter. You can not reuse the framework filter ... This is not a
big deal.
Kind regards,
Peter Kriens
On 30 sep 2008, at 10:58, Hampel, Michael wrote:
Ok - if I understand you right this would mean to change
Ok - if I understand you right this would mean to change Felix OBR's code
to strip the unrecognized operators before it calls
BundleContextImpl.createFilter()?
Or do you mean to change the Equinox implementation?
Thanx again,
Michael
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Peter Kriens [mailto:[
7 matches
Mail list logo
