Hey,
I'm looking to use a manipulation-time iPojo extension module
(wisdom-ipojo-module) with the Bnd iPojo plugin from Maven... and the
Pojoization BND plugin can't seem to find wisdom-ipojo-module. I checked
the build output with -X, Maven does pass the iPojo extension to BND
along with the iPojo Bnd plugin, but iPojo can't seem to find it :)
Well, re-reading this ... let's just say even XML will be clearer :)
Here's the working version with iPojo Maven Plugin:
<plugin>
<groupId>org.apache.felix</groupId>
<artifactId>maven-bundle-plugin</artifactId>
<version>2.5.3</version>
<extensions>true</extensions>
<configuration>
<instructions>
<_include>bnd.bnd</_include>
</instructions>
</configuration>
</plugin>
<plugin>
<groupId>org.apache.felix</groupId>
<artifactId>maven-ipojo-plugin</artifactId>
<version>1.12.0</version>
<executions>
<execution>
<goals>
<goal>ipojo-bundle</goal>
</goals>
</execution>
</executions>
<dependencies>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.wisdom-framework</groupId>
<artifactId>wisdom-ipojo-module</artifactId>
<version>${wisdom.version}</version>
</dependency>
</dependencies>
</plugin>
And here's the version using the Bnd Ipojo Plugin that doesn't work but
should be equivalent:
<plugin>
<groupId>org.apache.felix</groupId>
<artifactId>maven-bundle-plugin</artifactId>
<version>2.5.3</version>
<extensions>true</extensions>
<configuration>
<instructions>
<_plugin>
org.apache.felix.ipojo.bnd.PojoizationPlugin
</_plugin>
<_include>bnd.bnd</_include>
</instructions>
</configuration>
<dependencies>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.wisdom-framework</groupId>
<artifactId>wisdom-ipojo-module</artifactId>
<version>${wisdom.version}</version>
</dependency>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.apache.felix</groupId>
<artifactId>bnd-ipojo-plugin</artifactId>
<version>1.12.0</version>
</dependency>
</dependencies>
</plugin>
Obviously, I prefer the latter since it allows me to configure all OSGi
projects with only a 2-liner maven-bundle-plugin build declaration,
whether it's iPojo or DS.
I suspect the culprit is in the Bnd Ipojo Module, but an early look at
the code didn't give a clear reason why.
Any pointers appreciated (Guillaume or Clément?)
Cheers,
--
Simon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
