Jason van Zyl-5 wrote:
>
>
> On 27-Jan-09, at 6:41 PM, Barrie Treloar wrote:
>
>>> repositories. They might become OBRs at some point when OSGi becomes
>>> more "mainstream".
>>
>> One thing I have been toying with for a while is to auto-magically
>> extend maven-jar-plugin to add the OSGi hea
.html
--- Deneux, Christophe schrieb am Fr,
30.1.2009:
> Von: Deneux, Christophe
> Betreff: RE : RE : RE : maven / osgi / repositories
> An: "Maven Users List" , "Maven Users List"
>
> Datum: Freitag, 30. Januar 2009, 9:12
> Sorry, but I haven't a s
pgemini encourages environmental awareness.
>
>
>
> De: Henri Gomez [mailto:henri.go...@gmail.com]
> Date: mer. 28/01/2009 18:04
> À: Maven Users List
> Objet : Re: RE : maven / osgi / repositories
>
>
>
> 2009/1/28 Deneux, Christophe :
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
> On 27-Jan-09, at 6:41 PM, Barrie Treloar wrote:
>
>>> repositories. They might become OBRs at some point when OSGi becomes
>>> more "mainstream".
>>
>> One thing I have been toying with for a while is to auto-magically
>> extend maven-jar-p
.@sonatype.com]
Sent: Tue 1/27/2009 10:43 PM
To: Maven Users List
Subject: Re: maven / osgi / repositories
On 27-Jan-09, at 6:41 PM, Barrie Treloar wrote:
>> repositories. They might become OBRs at some point when OSGi becomes
>> more "mainstream".
>
> One thing I ha
>> One thing I have been toying with for a while is to auto-magically
>> extend maven-jar-plugin to add the OSGi headers.
> I really don't think this is a great idea. I think for a bundle to be useful
> someone needs to provide proper imports and exports.
Right, but it make took years ;(
>> I ha
On 27-Jan-09, at 6:41 PM, Barrie Treloar wrote:
repositories. They might become OBRs at some point when OSGi becomes
more "mainstream".
One thing I have been toying with for a while is to auto-magically
extend maven-jar-plugin to add the OSGi headers.
I really don't think this is a great i
____________
>
> De: Henri Gomez [mailto:henri.go...@gmail.com]
> Date: mer. 28/01/2009 18:04
> À: Maven Users List
> Objet : Re: RE : maven / osgi / repositories
>
>
>
> 2009/1/28 Deneux, Christophe :
>> Isn't the role of the "classifi
l awareness.
De: Henri Gomez [mailto:henri.go...@gmail.com]
Date: mer. 28/01/2009 18:04
À: Maven Users List
Objet : Re: RE : maven / osgi / repositories
2009/1/28 Deneux, Christophe :
> Isn't the role of the "classifier" field ?
>
> in
2009/1/28 Deneux, Christophe :
> Isn't the role of the "classifier" field ?
>
> instead of :
>
> org.apache.ant
> ant
> 1.7.1
>
> we could use :
>
> org.apache.ant
> ant
> 1.7.1
> osgi
Good but how do you specify such classifier in dependants projects ?
---
Isn't the role of the "classifier" field ?
instead of :
org.apache.ant
ant
1.7.1
we could use :
org.apache.ant
ant
1.7.1
osgi
De: Henri Gomez [mailto:henri.go...@gmail.com]
Date: mar. 27/01/2009 23:00
À: Maven Users List
Objet : R
> repositories. They might become OBRs at some point when OSGi becomes
> more "mainstream".
One thing I have been toying with for a while is to auto-magically
extend maven-jar-plugin to add the OSGi headers.
I haven't given a lot of thought into what I need to do, but if I
recall correctly, getti
> as you point it out there is definitely an issue with the renaming of
> groupId /artifactId as it will 'break' maven dependency management.
> However I don't think that anyone but the project owner(s) should be
> allowed to deploy a jar with their groupId/artifactId (to the public
> repo). I beli
Hi,
as you point it out there is definitely an issue with the renaming of
groupId /artifactId as it will 'break' maven dependency management.
However I don't think that anyone but the project owner(s) should be
allowed to deploy a jar with their groupId/artifactId (to the public
repo). I believe t
> Hi Henri,
>
> it seems to me that OSGi jars are not meant to be anything else that
> traditional jars with extra information in their MANIFEST. I would
> definitely recomment deploying them as standard jar as you would do
> for any normal maven project.
Simple jar with MANIFEST, but today very f
>> Another point of reference you might consider is how the springsource
>> guys make OSGi-ified version of many java libraries in their bundle
>> repository [http://www.springsource.com/repository/]. This acts pretty
>> much as a simple maven repository delivering jars.
>
> ..with renamed group/ar
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 22:53:10 +1100, Samuel Le Berrigaud wrote:
> Another point of reference you might consider is how the springsource
> guys make OSGi-ified version of many java libraries in their bundle
> repository [http://www.springsource.com/repository/]. This acts pretty
> much as a simple m
Hi Henri,
it seems to me that OSGi jars are not meant to be anything else that
traditional jars with extra information in their MANIFEST. I would
definitely recomment deploying them as standard jar as you would do
for any normal maven project.
One thing that could/would differentiate your OSGi ja
18 matches
Mail list logo
