David, I used all the three main lists because I wanted to reach out to a bigger audience.
I'm kind of leaning towards what you have suggested below. But I was wondering how others are tackling this issue. I'm sure I'm not the only one with this issue! Thanks Matt On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:54 PM, David Jencks <[email protected]>wrote: > Kind of a wide range of mailing lists for your question.... > > why wouldn't you have different bundles for different profiles, registering > services with the same interfaces and properties? You don't even need to > use blueprint for all your profile bundles. It seems to me that bean > definition profiles are kind of a workaround for the lack of flexibility in > non-osgi environments. > > thanks > david jencks > > On May 23, 2011, at 9:47 AM, Matt Madhavan wrote: > > > Hello All, > > This is an interesting question for you all! > > > > For all these years Spring users have been building custom built solution > > for Bean Definition Profiles which is now part of the Spring 3.1 > (currently > > M1). > > > > The following blog talks about the Bean Definition Profile > > > http://blog.springsource.com/2011/02/11/spring-framework-3-1-m1-released/ > > > > Is there an equivalent Framework/development work available/going on for > > OSGi/Blueprint. I'm just curious. > > > > Regardless, I feel this may lead to an interesting discussion. This > > technology may prove crucial as OSGi is used in more Enterprise > development. > > > > Thanks > > Matt > >
