Explicitly import sun.misc when non-optional - yay or nay?

[Holger Hoffstätte <ho...@googlemail.com>]

Hi,

I'm trying to fix disruptor's b0rken bundle manifest and it hard-requires
sun.misc, hooray. This got me thinking: considering that sun.misc often
needs to be added to system packages/bootdelegation anyway, is it a good
idea to still explicitly import it? I *think* it is good style in order to
explicitly mark the dependency and provide clear resolution errors instead
of relying on "good luck" and randomly working bootdelegation. Others
might disgree.

So, explicit import non-optional system package dependency - good or bad?

-h


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org

Re: Explicitly import sun.misc when non-optional - yay or nay?

["Richard S. Hall" <he...@ungoverned.org>]

Good idea. Bundles should never lie about their dependencies.

-> richard

On 6/6/12 10:33 , Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to fix disruptor's b0rken bundle manifest and it hard-requires
> sun.misc, hooray. This got me thinking: considering that sun.misc often
> needs to be added to system packages/bootdelegation anyway, is it a good
> idea to still explicitly import it? I *think* it is good style in order to
> explicitly mark the dependency and provide clear resolution errors instead
> of relying on "good luck" and randomly working bootdelegation. Others
> might disgree.
>
> So, explicit import non-optional system package dependency - good or bad?
>
> -h
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@felix.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@felix.apache.org