On Monday 07 November 2016 12:01:08 Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> Bertrand Delacretaz wrote
> 
> > On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Oliver Lietz <[email protected]> 
wrote:
> >> ...If a bundle requires a capability the system has to provide that
> >> capability otherwise the bundle would not resolve....
> > 
> > That's a nice model but IIUC Carsten earlier in this thread OSGi
> > capabilities cannot be created at runtime so that won't work for
> > service users or access rights.
> 
> I just had the crazy idea that we could generate them at runtime by
> creating an artifical bundle providing the capabilities. When the
> capabilities change, that bundle could be updated.
> 
> I think that should be easily doable, but I haven't thought this
> completely through yet to see whether this is a good idea.

It doesn't need to be a bundle, but in lack of deeper knowledge of resolver 
(or framework and resources) I also thought of using a bundle as medium 
(resource).

O.

> Carsten
> 
> > If we want to express the access requirements of bundles or services
> > in a self-explaining way we could use the repoinit syntax (maybe
> > tweaked to be more declarative) and implement a service that checks
> > whether those expectations are met.
> > 
> > Having a way to verify the conformance of a Sling instance with a set
> > of repoinit statements would be useful anyway - but that's not
> > implemented so far.

Reply via email to