You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@aries.apache.org by Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com> on 2011/06/24 14:04:17 UTC
0.4
Anyone know when Aries 0.4 is planned for?
/Bengt
Re: 0.4
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
Hi Oliver.... one more comment :-)
On Jun 29, 2011, at 3:57 PM, Oliver Lietz wrote:
> Am Wednesday 29 June 2011 schrieb David Jencks:
>> Hi Oliver,
>
> hi David,
>
>> maven != osgi.
>>
>> I think the document about how the bundle is intended to be used is the
>> bundle manifest. The pom is there to build the bundle. If you want to
>> use the pom for something else, that's kind of your problem. If you
>> describe sufficiently clearly how you want to use the pom, we'll probably
>> try to oblige as long as it doesn't break the osgi metadata.
>>
>> Trying to use maven dependencies as a guide to osgi provisioning may
>> sometimes work, but calling a maven project broken because the way it
>> configures maven dependencies doesn't suit how you want to provision osgi
>> dependencies is just wrong.
>>
>> Btw I've devoted considerable effort over the last year to trying to relate
>> osgi provisioning to maven dependencies and my conclusion at this point is
>> that it is probably only useful over a very short range, probably for
>> building something like a karaf feature descriptor for bundles all from
>> one project.
>>
>> Your snippet below clearly shows the maven build succeeding. What makes
>> you think it's broken?
>
> thanks for making clear that Aries doesn't use pom's deps for giving OSGi
> provisioning information which I falsely assumed due to my experiencies with
> other OSGified projects.
> So I have to add the bundles org.apache.aries.proxy, org.apache.aries.util,
> org.objectweb.asm, org.objectweb.asm.commons and org.objectweb.asm.tree (or at
> least org.apache.aries.proxy.api and org.apache.aries.util) as mentioned in my
> first mail to use the blueprint-bundle and to satisfy all package imports (and
> not only "to rub tests").
> Hopefully this thread will help others to find this information as I couldn't
> find it anywhere in source or on the project website.
I was also extremely annoyed at first to find I had to add all these dependencies "by hand". After thinking about it for a couple of weeks I'm less annoyed. Aries is the only osgi project I've worked with where people are actually trying to use osgi package and bundle versions carefully and correctly at the bundle level. No releases have actually happened since the project has been set up to deal with this, and I'm waiting to see if releasing bundles will be manageable with this setup. However, what this means is that once a few releases have happened it will be very unlikely that maven dependencies will give you appropriate versions of the aries bundles you need.. You really need something more like an obr repository built from the maven repository to do provisioning. While I've been a hard-core maven advocate for about 7 years now, I think it's dependency model, being similar to osgi require-bundle, is now pretty clearly broken, and even the maven developers are wondering what to do. (see recent maven dev thread on <scope>peri</scope> where yesterday Stephen Connolly admitted osgi would solve the problems being discussed).
thanks
david jencks
>
> thanks again,
> O.
>
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>> On Jun 29, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Oliver Lietz wrote:
>>> Am Wednesday 29 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
>>>> The pom clearly "works" since we build the bundle correctly using it.
>>>> I'm betting you are trying to use it in a way we didn't intend so can
>>>> you provide information on what you are doing so we can look into it?
>>>
>>> haha - nice one. Is there a document where the intended use is described?
>>>
>>> The build for blueprint-bundle is broken, because the bundle doesn't
>>> contain all necessary dependencies and blueprint-bundle's pom doesn't
>>> list them. After looking at DEPENDENCIES in META-INF and the output of
>>> dependency:tree I'm sure:
>>>
>>> beat:blueprint-bundle olli$ mvn clean dependency:tree
>>> [INFO] Scanning for projects...
>>> [INFO]
>>> [INFO]
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> [INFO] Building Apache Aries Blueprint Bundle 0.3.2-SNAPSHOT
>>> [INFO]
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> [WARNING] The POM for
>>> org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy.impl:jar:0.4-SNAPSHOT is
>>> invalid, transitive dependencies (if any) will not be available, enable
>>> debug logging for more details
>>> [INFO]
>>> [INFO] --- maven-clean-plugin:2.3:clean (default-clean) @
>>> org.apache.aries.blueprint ---
>>> [INFO]
>>> [INFO] --- maven-dependency-plugin:2.1:tree (default-cli) @
>>> org.apache.aries.blueprint ---
>>> [WARNING] Invalid POM for
>>> org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy.impl:jar:0.4-SNAPSHOT,
>>> transitive dependencies (if any) will not be available, enable debug
>>> logging for more details
>>> [INFO]
>>> org.apache.aries.blueprint:org.apache.aries.blueprint:bundle:0.3.2-
>>> SNAPSHOT
>>> [INFO] +-
>>> org.apache.aries.blueprint:org.apache.aries.blueprint.api:jar:0.3.2-
>>> SNAPSHOT:compile
>>> [INFO] +-
>>> org.apache.aries.blueprint:org.apache.aries.blueprint.core:jar:0.3.2-
>>> SNAPSHOT:compile
>>> [INFO] | +- org.apache.aries.blueprint:blueprint-parser:jar:0.4-
>>> SNAPSHOT:compile
>>> [INFO] | +-
>>> org.apache.aries:org.apache.aries.util:jar:0.4-SNAPSHOT:compile [INFO] |
>>> \- org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy.api:jar:0.4-
>>> SNAPSHOT:compile
>>> [INFO] +-
>>> org.apache.aries.blueprint:org.apache.aries.blueprint.cm:jar:0.3.2-
>>> SNAPSHOT:compile
>>> [INFO] +-
>>> org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy:jar:0.4-SNAPSHOT:test
>>> [INFO] | \- org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy.impl:jar:0.4-
>>> SNAPSHOT:test
>>> [INFO] +- asm:asm-all:jar:3.2:test
>>> [INFO] +- org.eclipse:osgi:jar:3.5.0.v20090520:provided
>>> [INFO] +- org.osgi:org.osgi.compendium:jar:4.2.0:provided
>>> [INFO] \-
>>> org.apache.aries.quiesce:org.apache.aries.quiesce.api:jar:0.3.1-
>>> SNAPSHOT:provided
>>> [INFO]
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
>>> [INFO]
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> [INFO] Total time: 19.515s
>>> [INFO] Finished at: Wed Jun 29 23:09:33 CEST 2011
>>> [INFO] Final Memory: 9M/1040M
>>> [INFO]
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> I already gave you a link to the project where I use blueprint-bundle,
>>> see below.
>>>
>>>> Alasdair Nottingham
>>>>
>>>> On 28 Jun 2011, at 23:21, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
>>>>> Am Wednesday 29 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
>>>>>> Alasdair Nottingham
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:46, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
>>>>>>> Am Tuesday 28 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
>>>>>>>> Alasdair Nottingham
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:06, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Am Monday 27 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> hey,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have
>>>>>>>>>> been more "on demand".
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release
>>>>>>>>>> process so their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were
>>>>>>>>>> previously. Some bundles might be at 0.4 and some at 0.3.1.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Do you need a release?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> a release with fixed dependencies would be nice. Instead of just
>>>>>>>>> switching from org.apache.aries.blueprint 0.2-incubating to 0.3.1 I
>>>>>>>>> had to add several missing dependencies (org.apache.aries.proxy,
>>>>>>>>> org.apache.aries.util, org.objectweb.asm,
>>>>>>>>> org.objectweb.asm.commons, org.objectweb.asm.tree).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm not sure I follow what you mean. I know 0.3 required more
>>>>>>>> externals, this was a deliberate decision.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Looks like the manifest of blueprint is broken as it imports
>>>>>>> org.apache.aries.proxy and org.apache.aries.util but the scope for
>>>>>>> org.apache.aries.proxy in pom.xml is "test".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It isn't broken. The org.apache.aries.proxy import is for a package.
>>>>>> The pom depends on modules or bundles. The org.apache.aries.proxy
>>>>>> bundle contains the implementation of the proxy package and is only
>>>>>> required to rub tests, not to compile the code.
>>>>>
>>>>> For sure it's broken, otherwise I won't get this unresolved constraint
>>>>> error:
>>>>>
>>>>> [org.ops4j.pax.exam.rbc.internal.Activator] : Binding
>>>>> RemoteBundleContext to RMI registry
>>>>> [org.ops4j.pax.exam.rbc.internal.Activator] : Remote Bundle Context
>>>>> started [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning
>>>>> bundle [org.ops4j.pax.exam.rbc]
>>>>> [ RemoteBundleContextClient] - Remote bundle context found after
>>>>> 1849 millis
>>>>> org.osgi.framework.BundleException: Unresolved constraint in bundle
>>>>> org.apache.aries.blueprint [10]: Unable to resolve 10.0: missing
>>>>> requirement [10.0] package;
>>>>> (&(package=org.apache.aries.proxy)(version>=0.3.0)(! (version>=1.0.0)))
>>>>>
>>>>> at org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.resolveBundle(Felix.java:3404)
>>>>> at org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.startBundle(Felix.java:1714)
>>>>> at
>>>>> org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.setActiveStartLevel(Felix.java:1143)
>>>>> at
>>>>> org.apache.felix.framework.StartLevelImpl.run(StartLevelImpl.java:264
>>>>> ) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:680)
>>>>>
>>>>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
>>>>> [org.springextensions.db4o]
>>>>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
>>>>> [org.springframework.beans]
>>>>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
>>>>> [org.springframework.core]
>>>>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
>>>>> [org.springframework.transaction]
>>>>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
>>>>> [com.db4o.java5]
>>>>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
>>>>> [com.springsource.org.apache.tools.ant]
>>>>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
>>>>> [com.springsource.javax.inject]
>>>>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
>>>>> [osgi.core] [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning
>>>>> bundle [osgi.cmpn] ERROR: Error starting
>>>>> file:bundles/org.apache.aries.blueprint_0.3.1.jar
>>>>> (org.osgi.framework.BundleException: Unresolved constraint in bundle
>>>>> org.apache.aries.blueprint [10]: Unable to resolve 10.0: missing
>>>>> requirement [10.0] package;
>>>>> (&(package=org.apache.aries.proxy)(version>=0.3.0)(!
>>>>> (version>=1.0.0)))) [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] :
>>>>> Scanning bundle [org.apache.felix.configadmin]
>>>>>
>>>>> Adding the mentioned deps to the pom fixed it.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We aren't going to bundle dependencies
>>>>>>>> into the bundles in the future. If you mean you want a zip that
>>>>>>>> contains everything you need for blueprint or jpa
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, I just want a newer version of blueprint in my OSGi integration
>>>>>>> tests
>>>>>>> (https://src.springframework.org/svn/se-db4o/trunk/org.springextensio
>>>>>>> n s.d b4o- it-osgi/pom.xml).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> we have discussed this and have
>>>>>>>> support, we just haven't done a distribution release yet.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> O.
>
Re: 0.4
Posted by Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de>.
Am Wednesday 29 June 2011 schrieb David Jencks:
> Hi Oliver,
hi David,
> maven != osgi.
>
> I think the document about how the bundle is intended to be used is the
> bundle manifest. The pom is there to build the bundle. If you want to
> use the pom for something else, that's kind of your problem. If you
> describe sufficiently clearly how you want to use the pom, we'll probably
> try to oblige as long as it doesn't break the osgi metadata.
>
> Trying to use maven dependencies as a guide to osgi provisioning may
> sometimes work, but calling a maven project broken because the way it
> configures maven dependencies doesn't suit how you want to provision osgi
> dependencies is just wrong.
>
> Btw I've devoted considerable effort over the last year to trying to relate
> osgi provisioning to maven dependencies and my conclusion at this point is
> that it is probably only useful over a very short range, probably for
> building something like a karaf feature descriptor for bundles all from
> one project.
>
> Your snippet below clearly shows the maven build succeeding. What makes
> you think it's broken?
thanks for making clear that Aries doesn't use pom's deps for giving OSGi
provisioning information which I falsely assumed due to my experiencies with
other OSGified projects.
So I have to add the bundles org.apache.aries.proxy, org.apache.aries.util,
org.objectweb.asm, org.objectweb.asm.commons and org.objectweb.asm.tree (or at
least org.apache.aries.proxy.api and org.apache.aries.util) as mentioned in my
first mail to use the blueprint-bundle and to satisfy all package imports (and
not only "to rub tests").
Hopefully this thread will help others to find this information as I couldn't
find it anywhere in source or on the project website.
thanks again,
O.
> thanks
> david jencks
>
> On Jun 29, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Oliver Lietz wrote:
> > Am Wednesday 29 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> >> The pom clearly "works" since we build the bundle correctly using it.
> >> I'm betting you are trying to use it in a way we didn't intend so can
> >> you provide information on what you are doing so we can look into it?
> >
> > haha - nice one. Is there a document where the intended use is described?
> >
> > The build for blueprint-bundle is broken, because the bundle doesn't
> > contain all necessary dependencies and blueprint-bundle's pom doesn't
> > list them. After looking at DEPENDENCIES in META-INF and the output of
> > dependency:tree I'm sure:
> >
> > beat:blueprint-bundle olli$ mvn clean dependency:tree
> > [INFO] Scanning for projects...
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] Building Apache Aries Blueprint Bundle 0.3.2-SNAPSHOT
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [WARNING] The POM for
> > org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy.impl:jar:0.4-SNAPSHOT is
> > invalid, transitive dependencies (if any) will not be available, enable
> > debug logging for more details
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-clean-plugin:2.3:clean (default-clean) @
> > org.apache.aries.blueprint ---
> > [INFO]
> > [INFO] --- maven-dependency-plugin:2.1:tree (default-cli) @
> > org.apache.aries.blueprint ---
> > [WARNING] Invalid POM for
> > org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy.impl:jar:0.4-SNAPSHOT,
> > transitive dependencies (if any) will not be available, enable debug
> > logging for more details
> > [INFO]
> > org.apache.aries.blueprint:org.apache.aries.blueprint:bundle:0.3.2-
> > SNAPSHOT
> > [INFO] +-
> > org.apache.aries.blueprint:org.apache.aries.blueprint.api:jar:0.3.2-
> > SNAPSHOT:compile
> > [INFO] +-
> > org.apache.aries.blueprint:org.apache.aries.blueprint.core:jar:0.3.2-
> > SNAPSHOT:compile
> > [INFO] | +- org.apache.aries.blueprint:blueprint-parser:jar:0.4-
> > SNAPSHOT:compile
> > [INFO] | +-
> > org.apache.aries:org.apache.aries.util:jar:0.4-SNAPSHOT:compile [INFO] |
> > \- org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy.api:jar:0.4-
> > SNAPSHOT:compile
> > [INFO] +-
> > org.apache.aries.blueprint:org.apache.aries.blueprint.cm:jar:0.3.2-
> > SNAPSHOT:compile
> > [INFO] +-
> > org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy:jar:0.4-SNAPSHOT:test
> > [INFO] | \- org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy.impl:jar:0.4-
> > SNAPSHOT:test
> > [INFO] +- asm:asm-all:jar:3.2:test
> > [INFO] +- org.eclipse:osgi:jar:3.5.0.v20090520:provided
> > [INFO] +- org.osgi:org.osgi.compendium:jar:4.2.0:provided
> > [INFO] \-
> > org.apache.aries.quiesce:org.apache.aries.quiesce.api:jar:0.3.1-
> > SNAPSHOT:provided
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] Total time: 19.515s
> > [INFO] Finished at: Wed Jun 29 23:09:33 CEST 2011
> > [INFO] Final Memory: 9M/1040M
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > I already gave you a link to the project where I use blueprint-bundle,
> > see below.
> >
> >> Alasdair Nottingham
> >>
> >> On 28 Jun 2011, at 23:21, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
> >>> Am Wednesday 29 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> >>>> Alasdair Nottingham
> >>>>
> >>>> On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:46, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
> >>>>> Am Tuesday 28 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> >>>>>> Alasdair Nottingham
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:06, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Am Monday 27 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> >>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> hey,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have
> >>>>>>>> been more "on demand".
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release
> >>>>>>>> process so their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were
> >>>>>>>> previously. Some bundles might be at 0.4 and some at 0.3.1.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Do you need a release?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> a release with fixed dependencies would be nice. Instead of just
> >>>>>>> switching from org.apache.aries.blueprint 0.2-incubating to 0.3.1 I
> >>>>>>> had to add several missing dependencies (org.apache.aries.proxy,
> >>>>>>> org.apache.aries.util, org.objectweb.asm,
> >>>>>>> org.objectweb.asm.commons, org.objectweb.asm.tree).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'm not sure I follow what you mean. I know 0.3 required more
> >>>>>> externals, this was a deliberate decision.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Looks like the manifest of blueprint is broken as it imports
> >>>>> org.apache.aries.proxy and org.apache.aries.util but the scope for
> >>>>> org.apache.aries.proxy in pom.xml is "test".
> >>>>
> >>>> It isn't broken. The org.apache.aries.proxy import is for a package.
> >>>> The pom depends on modules or bundles. The org.apache.aries.proxy
> >>>> bundle contains the implementation of the proxy package and is only
> >>>> required to rub tests, not to compile the code.
> >>>
> >>> For sure it's broken, otherwise I won't get this unresolved constraint
> >>> error:
> >>>
> >>> [org.ops4j.pax.exam.rbc.internal.Activator] : Binding
> >>> RemoteBundleContext to RMI registry
> >>> [org.ops4j.pax.exam.rbc.internal.Activator] : Remote Bundle Context
> >>> started [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning
> >>> bundle [org.ops4j.pax.exam.rbc]
> >>> [ RemoteBundleContextClient] - Remote bundle context found after
> >>> 1849 millis
> >>> org.osgi.framework.BundleException: Unresolved constraint in bundle
> >>> org.apache.aries.blueprint [10]: Unable to resolve 10.0: missing
> >>> requirement [10.0] package;
> >>> (&(package=org.apache.aries.proxy)(version>=0.3.0)(! (version>=1.0.0)))
> >>>
> >>> at org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.resolveBundle(Felix.java:3404)
> >>> at org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.startBundle(Felix.java:1714)
> >>> at
> >>> org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.setActiveStartLevel(Felix.java:1143)
> >>> at
> >>> org.apache.felix.framework.StartLevelImpl.run(StartLevelImpl.java:264
> >>> ) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:680)
> >>>
> >>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> >>> [org.springextensions.db4o]
> >>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> >>> [org.springframework.beans]
> >>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> >>> [org.springframework.core]
> >>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> >>> [org.springframework.transaction]
> >>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> >>> [com.db4o.java5]
> >>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> >>> [com.springsource.org.apache.tools.ant]
> >>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> >>> [com.springsource.javax.inject]
> >>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> >>> [osgi.core] [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning
> >>> bundle [osgi.cmpn] ERROR: Error starting
> >>> file:bundles/org.apache.aries.blueprint_0.3.1.jar
> >>> (org.osgi.framework.BundleException: Unresolved constraint in bundle
> >>> org.apache.aries.blueprint [10]: Unable to resolve 10.0: missing
> >>> requirement [10.0] package;
> >>> (&(package=org.apache.aries.proxy)(version>=0.3.0)(!
> >>> (version>=1.0.0)))) [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] :
> >>> Scanning bundle [org.apache.felix.configadmin]
> >>>
> >>> Adding the mentioned deps to the pom fixed it.
> >>>
> >>>>>> We aren't going to bundle dependencies
> >>>>>> into the bundles in the future. If you mean you want a zip that
> >>>>>> contains everything you need for blueprint or jpa
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No, I just want a newer version of blueprint in my OSGi integration
> >>>>> tests
> >>>>> (https://src.springframework.org/svn/se-db4o/trunk/org.springextensio
> >>>>> n s.d b4o- it-osgi/pom.xml).
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> we have discussed this and have
> >>>>>> support, we just haven't done a distribution release yet.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> O.
Re: 0.4
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
Hi Oliver,
maven != osgi.
I think the document about how the bundle is intended to be used is the bundle manifest. The pom is there to build the bundle. If you want to use the pom for something else, that's kind of your problem. If you describe sufficiently clearly how you want to use the pom, we'll probably try to oblige as long as it doesn't break the osgi metadata.
Trying to use maven dependencies as a guide to osgi provisioning may sometimes work, but calling a maven project broken because the way it configures maven dependencies doesn't suit how you want to provision osgi dependencies is just wrong.
Btw I've devoted considerable effort over the last year to trying to relate osgi provisioning to maven dependencies and my conclusion at this point is that it is probably only useful over a very short range, probably for building something like a karaf feature descriptor for bundles all from one project.
Your snippet below clearly shows the maven build succeeding. What makes you think it's broken?
thanks
david jencks
On Jun 29, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Oliver Lietz wrote:
> Am Wednesday 29 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
>> The pom clearly "works" since we build the bundle correctly using it. I'm
>> betting you are trying to use it in a way we didn't intend so can you
>> provide information on what you are doing so we can look into it?
>
> haha - nice one. Is there a document where the intended use is described?
>
> The build for blueprint-bundle is broken, because the bundle doesn't contain
> all necessary dependencies and blueprint-bundle's pom doesn't list them.
> After looking at DEPENDENCIES in META-INF and the output of dependency:tree
> I'm sure:
>
> beat:blueprint-bundle olli$ mvn clean dependency:tree
> [INFO] Scanning for projects...
> [INFO]
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [INFO] Building Apache Aries Blueprint Bundle 0.3.2-SNAPSHOT
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [WARNING] The POM for
> org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy.impl:jar:0.4-SNAPSHOT is
> invalid, transitive dependencies (if any) will not be available, enable debug
> logging for more details
> [INFO]
> [INFO] --- maven-clean-plugin:2.3:clean (default-clean) @
> org.apache.aries.blueprint ---
> [INFO]
> [INFO] --- maven-dependency-plugin:2.1:tree (default-cli) @
> org.apache.aries.blueprint ---
> [WARNING] Invalid POM for
> org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy.impl:jar:0.4-SNAPSHOT,
> transitive dependencies (if any) will not be available, enable debug logging
> for more details
> [INFO] org.apache.aries.blueprint:org.apache.aries.blueprint:bundle:0.3.2-
> SNAPSHOT
> [INFO] +- org.apache.aries.blueprint:org.apache.aries.blueprint.api:jar:0.3.2-
> SNAPSHOT:compile
> [INFO] +-
> org.apache.aries.blueprint:org.apache.aries.blueprint.core:jar:0.3.2-
> SNAPSHOT:compile
> [INFO] | +- org.apache.aries.blueprint:blueprint-parser:jar:0.4-
> SNAPSHOT:compile
> [INFO] | +- org.apache.aries:org.apache.aries.util:jar:0.4-SNAPSHOT:compile
> [INFO] | \- org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy.api:jar:0.4-
> SNAPSHOT:compile
> [INFO] +- org.apache.aries.blueprint:org.apache.aries.blueprint.cm:jar:0.3.2-
> SNAPSHOT:compile
> [INFO] +- org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy:jar:0.4-SNAPSHOT:test
> [INFO] | \- org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy.impl:jar:0.4-
> SNAPSHOT:test
> [INFO] +- asm:asm-all:jar:3.2:test
> [INFO] +- org.eclipse:osgi:jar:3.5.0.v20090520:provided
> [INFO] +- org.osgi:org.osgi.compendium:jar:4.2.0:provided
> [INFO] \- org.apache.aries.quiesce:org.apache.aries.quiesce.api:jar:0.3.1-
> SNAPSHOT:provided
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [INFO] Total time: 19.515s
> [INFO] Finished at: Wed Jun 29 23:09:33 CEST 2011
> [INFO] Final Memory: 9M/1040M
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I already gave you a link to the project where I use blueprint-bundle, see
> below.
>
>> Alasdair Nottingham
>>
>> On 28 Jun 2011, at 23:21, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
>>> Am Wednesday 29 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
>>>> Alasdair Nottingham
>>>>
>>>> On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:46, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
>>>>> Am Tuesday 28 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
>>>>>> Alasdair Nottingham
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:06, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
>>>>>>> Am Monday 27 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> hey,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have been
>>>>>>>> more "on demand".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release
>>>>>>>> process so their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were
>>>>>>>> previously. Some bundles might be at 0.4 and some at 0.3.1.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you need a release?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> a release with fixed dependencies would be nice. Instead of just
>>>>>>> switching from org.apache.aries.blueprint 0.2-incubating to 0.3.1 I
>>>>>>> had to add several missing dependencies (org.apache.aries.proxy,
>>>>>>> org.apache.aries.util, org.objectweb.asm, org.objectweb.asm.commons,
>>>>>>> org.objectweb.asm.tree).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not sure I follow what you mean. I know 0.3 required more
>>>>>> externals, this was a deliberate decision.
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks like the manifest of blueprint is broken as it imports
>>>>> org.apache.aries.proxy and org.apache.aries.util but the scope for
>>>>> org.apache.aries.proxy in pom.xml is "test".
>>>>
>>>> It isn't broken. The org.apache.aries.proxy import is for a package. The
>>>> pom depends on modules or bundles. The org.apache.aries.proxy bundle
>>>> contains the implementation of the proxy package and is only required to
>>>> rub tests, not to compile the code.
>>>
>>> For sure it's broken, otherwise I won't get this unresolved constraint
>>> error:
>>>
>>> [org.ops4j.pax.exam.rbc.internal.Activator] : Binding RemoteBundleContext
>>> to RMI registry
>>> [org.ops4j.pax.exam.rbc.internal.Activator] : Remote Bundle Context
>>> started [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning
>>> bundle [org.ops4j.pax.exam.rbc]
>>> [ RemoteBundleContextClient] - Remote bundle context found after 1849
>>> millis
>>> org.osgi.framework.BundleException: Unresolved constraint in bundle
>>> org.apache.aries.blueprint [10]: Unable to resolve 10.0: missing
>>> requirement [10.0] package;
>>> (&(package=org.apache.aries.proxy)(version>=0.3.0)(! (version>=1.0.0)))
>>>
>>> at org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.resolveBundle(Felix.java:3404)
>>> at org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.startBundle(Felix.java:1714)
>>> at
>>> org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.setActiveStartLevel(Felix.java:1143)
>>> at
>>> org.apache.felix.framework.StartLevelImpl.run(StartLevelImpl.java:264
>>> ) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:680)
>>>
>>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
>>> [org.springextensions.db4o]
>>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
>>> [org.springframework.beans]
>>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
>>> [org.springframework.core]
>>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
>>> [org.springframework.transaction]
>>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
>>> [com.db4o.java5]
>>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
>>> [com.springsource.org.apache.tools.ant]
>>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
>>> [com.springsource.javax.inject]
>>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
>>> [osgi.core] [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning
>>> bundle [osgi.cmpn] ERROR: Error starting
>>> file:bundles/org.apache.aries.blueprint_0.3.1.jar
>>> (org.osgi.framework.BundleException: Unresolved constraint in bundle
>>> org.apache.aries.blueprint [10]: Unable to resolve 10.0: missing
>>> requirement [10.0] package;
>>> (&(package=org.apache.aries.proxy)(version>=0.3.0)(! (version>=1.0.0))))
>>> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
>>> [org.apache.felix.configadmin]
>>>
>>> Adding the mentioned deps to the pom fixed it.
>>>
>>>>>> We aren't going to bundle dependencies
>>>>>> into the bundles in the future. If you mean you want a zip that
>>>>>> contains everything you need for blueprint or jpa
>>>>>
>>>>> No, I just want a newer version of blueprint in my OSGi integration
>>>>> tests
>>>>> (https://src.springframework.org/svn/se-db4o/trunk/org.springextension
>>>>> s.d b4o- it-osgi/pom.xml).
>>>>>
>>>>>> we have discussed this and have
>>>>>> support, we just haven't done a distribution release yet.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> O.
>
Re: 0.4
Posted by Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de>.
Am Wednesday 29 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> The pom clearly "works" since we build the bundle correctly using it. I'm
> betting you are trying to use it in a way we didn't intend so can you
> provide information on what you are doing so we can look into it?
haha - nice one. Is there a document where the intended use is described?
The build for blueprint-bundle is broken, because the bundle doesn't contain
all necessary dependencies and blueprint-bundle's pom doesn't list them.
After looking at DEPENDENCIES in META-INF and the output of dependency:tree
I'm sure:
beat:blueprint-bundle olli$ mvn clean dependency:tree
[INFO] Scanning for projects...
[INFO]
[INFO]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[INFO] Building Apache Aries Blueprint Bundle 0.3.2-SNAPSHOT
[INFO]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[WARNING] The POM for
org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy.impl:jar:0.4-SNAPSHOT is
invalid, transitive dependencies (if any) will not be available, enable debug
logging for more details
[INFO]
[INFO] --- maven-clean-plugin:2.3:clean (default-clean) @
org.apache.aries.blueprint ---
[INFO]
[INFO] --- maven-dependency-plugin:2.1:tree (default-cli) @
org.apache.aries.blueprint ---
[WARNING] Invalid POM for
org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy.impl:jar:0.4-SNAPSHOT,
transitive dependencies (if any) will not be available, enable debug logging
for more details
[INFO] org.apache.aries.blueprint:org.apache.aries.blueprint:bundle:0.3.2-
SNAPSHOT
[INFO] +- org.apache.aries.blueprint:org.apache.aries.blueprint.api:jar:0.3.2-
SNAPSHOT:compile
[INFO] +-
org.apache.aries.blueprint:org.apache.aries.blueprint.core:jar:0.3.2-
SNAPSHOT:compile
[INFO] | +- org.apache.aries.blueprint:blueprint-parser:jar:0.4-
SNAPSHOT:compile
[INFO] | +- org.apache.aries:org.apache.aries.util:jar:0.4-SNAPSHOT:compile
[INFO] | \- org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy.api:jar:0.4-
SNAPSHOT:compile
[INFO] +- org.apache.aries.blueprint:org.apache.aries.blueprint.cm:jar:0.3.2-
SNAPSHOT:compile
[INFO] +- org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy:jar:0.4-SNAPSHOT:test
[INFO] | \- org.apache.aries.proxy:org.apache.aries.proxy.impl:jar:0.4-
SNAPSHOT:test
[INFO] +- asm:asm-all:jar:3.2:test
[INFO] +- org.eclipse:osgi:jar:3.5.0.v20090520:provided
[INFO] +- org.osgi:org.osgi.compendium:jar:4.2.0:provided
[INFO] \- org.apache.aries.quiesce:org.apache.aries.quiesce.api:jar:0.3.1-
SNAPSHOT:provided
[INFO]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
[INFO]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[INFO] Total time: 19.515s
[INFO] Finished at: Wed Jun 29 23:09:33 CEST 2011
[INFO] Final Memory: 9M/1040M
[INFO]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I already gave you a link to the project where I use blueprint-bundle, see
below.
> Alasdair Nottingham
>
> On 28 Jun 2011, at 23:21, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
> > Am Wednesday 29 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> >> Alasdair Nottingham
> >>
> >> On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:46, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
> >>> Am Tuesday 28 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> >>>> Alasdair Nottingham
> >>>>
> >>>> On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:06, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
> >>>>> Am Monday 27 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> hey,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have been
> >>>>>> more "on demand".
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release
> >>>>>> process so their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were
> >>>>>> previously. Some bundles might be at 0.4 and some at 0.3.1.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Do you need a release?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> a release with fixed dependencies would be nice. Instead of just
> >>>>> switching from org.apache.aries.blueprint 0.2-incubating to 0.3.1 I
> >>>>> had to add several missing dependencies (org.apache.aries.proxy,
> >>>>> org.apache.aries.util, org.objectweb.asm, org.objectweb.asm.commons,
> >>>>> org.objectweb.asm.tree).
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm not sure I follow what you mean. I know 0.3 required more
> >>>> externals, this was a deliberate decision.
> >>>
> >>> Looks like the manifest of blueprint is broken as it imports
> >>> org.apache.aries.proxy and org.apache.aries.util but the scope for
> >>> org.apache.aries.proxy in pom.xml is "test".
> >>
> >> It isn't broken. The org.apache.aries.proxy import is for a package. The
> >> pom depends on modules or bundles. The org.apache.aries.proxy bundle
> >> contains the implementation of the proxy package and is only required to
> >> rub tests, not to compile the code.
> >
> > For sure it's broken, otherwise I won't get this unresolved constraint
> > error:
> >
> > [org.ops4j.pax.exam.rbc.internal.Activator] : Binding RemoteBundleContext
> > to RMI registry
> > [org.ops4j.pax.exam.rbc.internal.Activator] : Remote Bundle Context
> > started [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning
> > bundle [org.ops4j.pax.exam.rbc]
> > [ RemoteBundleContextClient] - Remote bundle context found after 1849
> > millis
> > org.osgi.framework.BundleException: Unresolved constraint in bundle
> > org.apache.aries.blueprint [10]: Unable to resolve 10.0: missing
> > requirement [10.0] package;
> > (&(package=org.apache.aries.proxy)(version>=0.3.0)(! (version>=1.0.0)))
> >
> > at org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.resolveBundle(Felix.java:3404)
> > at org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.startBundle(Felix.java:1714)
> > at
> > org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.setActiveStartLevel(Felix.java:1143)
> > at
> > org.apache.felix.framework.StartLevelImpl.run(StartLevelImpl.java:264
> > ) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:680)
> >
> > [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> > [org.springextensions.db4o]
> > [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> > [org.springframework.beans]
> > [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> > [org.springframework.core]
> > [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> > [org.springframework.transaction]
> > [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> > [com.db4o.java5]
> > [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> > [com.springsource.org.apache.tools.ant]
> > [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> > [com.springsource.javax.inject]
> > [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> > [osgi.core] [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning
> > bundle [osgi.cmpn] ERROR: Error starting
> > file:bundles/org.apache.aries.blueprint_0.3.1.jar
> > (org.osgi.framework.BundleException: Unresolved constraint in bundle
> > org.apache.aries.blueprint [10]: Unable to resolve 10.0: missing
> > requirement [10.0] package;
> > (&(package=org.apache.aries.proxy)(version>=0.3.0)(! (version>=1.0.0))))
> > [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> > [org.apache.felix.configadmin]
> >
> > Adding the mentioned deps to the pom fixed it.
> >
> >>>> We aren't going to bundle dependencies
> >>>> into the bundles in the future. If you mean you want a zip that
> >>>> contains everything you need for blueprint or jpa
> >>>
> >>> No, I just want a newer version of blueprint in my OSGi integration
> >>> tests
> >>> (https://src.springframework.org/svn/se-db4o/trunk/org.springextension
> >>> s.d b4o- it-osgi/pom.xml).
> >>>
> >>>> we have discussed this and have
> >>>> support, we just haven't done a distribution release yet.
> >>>>
> >>>>> O.
Re: 0.4
Posted by Alasdair Nottingham <no...@apache.org>.
The pom clearly "works" since we build the bundle correctly using it. I'm betting you are trying to use it in a way we didn't intend so can you provide information on what you are doing so we can look into it?
Alasdair Nottingham
On 28 Jun 2011, at 23:21, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
> Am Wednesday 29 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
>> Alasdair Nottingham
>>
>> On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:46, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
>>> Am Tuesday 28 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
>>>> Alasdair Nottingham
>>>>
>>>> On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:06, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
>>>>> Am Monday 27 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> hey,
>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have been
>>>>>> more "on demand".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release
>>>>>> process so their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were
>>>>>> previously. Some bundles might be at 0.4 and some at 0.3.1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you need a release?
>>>>>
>>>>> a release with fixed dependencies would be nice. Instead of just
>>>>> switching from org.apache.aries.blueprint 0.2-incubating to 0.3.1 I had
>>>>> to add several missing dependencies (org.apache.aries.proxy,
>>>>> org.apache.aries.util, org.objectweb.asm, org.objectweb.asm.commons,
>>>>> org.objectweb.asm.tree).
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure I follow what you mean. I know 0.3 required more externals,
>>>> this was a deliberate decision.
>>>
>>> Looks like the manifest of blueprint is broken as it imports
>>> org.apache.aries.proxy and org.apache.aries.util but the scope for
>>> org.apache.aries.proxy in pom.xml is "test".
>>
>> It isn't broken. The org.apache.aries.proxy import is for a package. The
>> pom depends on modules or bundles. The org.apache.aries.proxy bundle
>> contains the implementation of the proxy package and is only required to
>> rub tests, not to compile the code.
>
> For sure it's broken, otherwise I won't get this unresolved constraint error:
>
> [org.ops4j.pax.exam.rbc.internal.Activator] : Binding RemoteBundleContext to
> RMI registry
> [org.ops4j.pax.exam.rbc.internal.Activator] : Remote Bundle Context started
> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> [org.ops4j.pax.exam.rbc]
> [ RemoteBundleContextClient] - Remote bundle context found after 1849
> millis
> org.osgi.framework.BundleException: Unresolved constraint in bundle
> org.apache.aries.blueprint [10]: Unable to resolve 10.0: missing requirement
> [10.0] package; (&(package=org.apache.aries.proxy)(version>=0.3.0)(!
> (version>=1.0.0)))
> at org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.resolveBundle(Felix.java:3404)
> at org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.startBundle(Felix.java:1714)
> at org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.setActiveStartLevel(Felix.java:1143)
> at org.apache.felix.framework.StartLevelImpl.run(StartLevelImpl.java:264)
> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:680)
> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> [org.springextensions.db4o]
> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> [org.springframework.beans]
> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> [org.springframework.core]
> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> [org.springframework.transaction]
> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> [com.db4o.java5]
> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> [com.springsource.org.apache.tools.ant]
> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> [com.springsource.javax.inject]
> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle [osgi.core]
> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle [osgi.cmpn]
> ERROR: Error starting file:bundles/org.apache.aries.blueprint_0.3.1.jar
> (org.osgi.framework.BundleException: Unresolved constraint in bundle
> org.apache.aries.blueprint [10]: Unable to resolve 10.0: missing requirement
> [10.0] package; (&(package=org.apache.aries.proxy)(version>=0.3.0)(!
> (version>=1.0.0))))
> [org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
> [org.apache.felix.configadmin]
>
> Adding the mentioned deps to the pom fixed it.
>
>>>> We aren't going to bundle dependencies
>>>> into the bundles in the future. If you mean you want a zip that contains
>>>> everything you need for blueprint or jpa
>>>
>>> No, I just want a newer version of blueprint in my OSGi integration tests
>>> (https://src.springframework.org/svn/se-db4o/trunk/org.springextensions.d
>>> b4o- it-osgi/pom.xml).
>>>
>>>> we have discussed this and have
>>>> support, we just haven't done a distribution release yet.
>>>>
>>>>> O.
>
Re: 0.4
Posted by Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de>.
Am Wednesday 29 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> Alasdair Nottingham
>
> On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:46, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
> > Am Tuesday 28 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> >> Alasdair Nottingham
> >>
> >> On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:06, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
> >>> Am Monday 27 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> hey,
> >>>
> >>>> I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have been
> >>>> more "on demand".
> >>>>
> >>>> After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release
> >>>> process so their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were
> >>>> previously. Some bundles might be at 0.4 and some at 0.3.1.
> >>>>
> >>>> Do you need a release?
> >>>
> >>> a release with fixed dependencies would be nice. Instead of just
> >>> switching from org.apache.aries.blueprint 0.2-incubating to 0.3.1 I had
> >>> to add several missing dependencies (org.apache.aries.proxy,
> >>> org.apache.aries.util, org.objectweb.asm, org.objectweb.asm.commons,
> >>> org.objectweb.asm.tree).
> >>
> >> I'm not sure I follow what you mean. I know 0.3 required more externals,
> >> this was a deliberate decision.
> >
> > Looks like the manifest of blueprint is broken as it imports
> > org.apache.aries.proxy and org.apache.aries.util but the scope for
> > org.apache.aries.proxy in pom.xml is "test".
>
> It isn't broken. The org.apache.aries.proxy import is for a package. The
> pom depends on modules or bundles. The org.apache.aries.proxy bundle
> contains the implementation of the proxy package and is only required to
> rub tests, not to compile the code.
For sure it's broken, otherwise I won't get this unresolved constraint error:
[org.ops4j.pax.exam.rbc.internal.Activator] : Binding RemoteBundleContext to
RMI registry
[org.ops4j.pax.exam.rbc.internal.Activator] : Remote Bundle Context started
[org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
[org.ops4j.pax.exam.rbc]
[ RemoteBundleContextClient] - Remote bundle context found after 1849
millis
org.osgi.framework.BundleException: Unresolved constraint in bundle
org.apache.aries.blueprint [10]: Unable to resolve 10.0: missing requirement
[10.0] package; (&(package=org.apache.aries.proxy)(version>=0.3.0)(!
(version>=1.0.0)))
at org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.resolveBundle(Felix.java:3404)
at org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.startBundle(Felix.java:1714)
at org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.setActiveStartLevel(Felix.java:1143)
at org.apache.felix.framework.StartLevelImpl.run(StartLevelImpl.java:264)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:680)
[org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
[org.springextensions.db4o]
[org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
[org.springframework.beans]
[org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
[org.springframework.core]
[org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
[org.springframework.transaction]
[org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
[com.db4o.java5]
[org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
[com.springsource.org.apache.tools.ant]
[org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
[com.springsource.javax.inject]
[org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle [osgi.core]
[org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle [osgi.cmpn]
ERROR: Error starting file:bundles/org.apache.aries.blueprint_0.3.1.jar
(org.osgi.framework.BundleException: Unresolved constraint in bundle
org.apache.aries.blueprint [10]: Unable to resolve 10.0: missing requirement
[10.0] package; (&(package=org.apache.aries.proxy)(version>=0.3.0)(!
(version>=1.0.0))))
[org.ops4j.pax.swissbox.extender.BundleWatcher] : Scanning bundle
[org.apache.felix.configadmin]
Adding the mentioned deps to the pom fixed it.
> >> We aren't going to bundle dependencies
> >> into the bundles in the future. If you mean you want a zip that contains
> >> everything you need for blueprint or jpa
> >
> > No, I just want a newer version of blueprint in my OSGi integration tests
> > (https://src.springframework.org/svn/se-db4o/trunk/org.springextensions.d
> > b4o- it-osgi/pom.xml).
> >
> >> we have discussed this and have
> >> support, we just haven't done a distribution release yet.
> >>
> >>> O.
Re: 0.4
Posted by Alasdair Nottingham <no...@apache.org>.
Alasdair Nottingham
On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:46, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
> Am Tuesday 28 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
>> Alasdair Nottingham
>>
>> On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:06, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
>>> Am Monday 27 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
>>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> hey,
>>>
>>>> I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have been more
>>>> "on demand".
>>>>
>>>> After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release process
>>>> so their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were previously. Some
>>>> bundles might be at 0.4 and some at 0.3.1.
>>>>
>>>> Do you need a release?
>>>
>>> a release with fixed dependencies would be nice. Instead of just
>>> switching from org.apache.aries.blueprint 0.2-incubating to 0.3.1 I had
>>> to add several missing dependencies (org.apache.aries.proxy,
>>> org.apache.aries.util, org.objectweb.asm, org.objectweb.asm.commons,
>>> org.objectweb.asm.tree).
>>
>> I'm not sure I follow what you mean. I know 0.3 required more externals,
>> this was a deliberate decision.
>
> Looks like the manifest of blueprint is broken as it imports
> org.apache.aries.proxy and org.apache.aries.util but the scope for
> org.apache.aries.proxy in pom.xml is "test".
It isn't broken. The org.apache.aries.proxy import is for a package. The pom depends on modules or bundles. The org.apache.aries.proxy bundle contains the implementation of the proxy package and is only required to rub tests, not to compile the code.
>
>> We aren't going to bundle dependencies
>> into the bundles in the future. If you mean you want a zip that contains
>> everything you need for blueprint or jpa
>
> No, I just want a newer version of blueprint in my OSGi integration tests
> (https://src.springframework.org/svn/se-db4o/trunk/org.springextensions.db4o-
> it-osgi/pom.xml).
>
>> we have discussed this and have
>> support, we just haven't done a distribution release yet.
>>
>>> O.
>
Re: 0.4
Posted by Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de>.
Am Tuesday 28 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> Alasdair Nottingham
>
> On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:06, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
> > Am Monday 27 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> >> Hi,
> >
> > hey,
> >
> >> I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have been more
> >> "on demand".
> >>
> >> After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release process
> >> so their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were previously. Some
> >> bundles might be at 0.4 and some at 0.3.1.
> >>
> >> Do you need a release?
> >
> > a release with fixed dependencies would be nice. Instead of just
> > switching from org.apache.aries.blueprint 0.2-incubating to 0.3.1 I had
> > to add several missing dependencies (org.apache.aries.proxy,
> > org.apache.aries.util, org.objectweb.asm, org.objectweb.asm.commons,
> > org.objectweb.asm.tree).
>
> I'm not sure I follow what you mean. I know 0.3 required more externals,
> this was a deliberate decision.
Looks like the manifest of blueprint is broken as it imports
org.apache.aries.proxy and org.apache.aries.util but the scope for
org.apache.aries.proxy in pom.xml is "test".
> We aren't going to bundle dependencies
> into the bundles in the future. If you mean you want a zip that contains
> everything you need for blueprint or jpa
No, I just want a newer version of blueprint in my OSGi integration tests
(https://src.springframework.org/svn/se-db4o/trunk/org.springextensions.db4o-
it-osgi/pom.xml).
> we have discussed this and have
> support, we just haven't done a distribution release yet.
>
> > O.
Re: 0.4
Posted by Alasdair Nottingham <no...@apache.org>.
Alasdair Nottingham
On 28 Jun 2011, at 22:06, Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de> wrote:
> Am Monday 27 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
>> Hi,
>
> hey,
>
>> I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have been more
>> "on demand".
>>
>> After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release process so
>> their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were previously. Some bundles
>> might be at 0.4 and some at 0.3.1.
>>
>> Do you need a release?
>
> a release with fixed dependencies would be nice. Instead of just switching
> from org.apache.aries.blueprint 0.2-incubating to 0.3.1 I had to add several
> missing dependencies (org.apache.aries.proxy, org.apache.aries.util,
> org.objectweb.asm, org.objectweb.asm.commons, org.objectweb.asm.tree).
>
I'm not sure I follow what you mean. I know 0.3 required more externals, this was a deliberate decision. We aren't going to bundle dependencies into the bundles in the future. If you mean you want a zip that contains everything you need for blueprint or jpa we have discussed this and have support, we just haven't done a distribution release yet.
> O.
>
Re: 0.4
Posted by Oliver Lietz <ap...@oliverlietz.de>.
Am Monday 27 June 2011 schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
> Hi,
hey,
> I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have been more
> "on demand".
>
> After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release process so
> their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were previously. Some bundles
> might be at 0.4 and some at 0.3.1.
>
> Do you need a release?
a release with fixed dependencies would be nice. Instead of just switching
from org.apache.aries.blueprint 0.2-incubating to 0.3.1 I had to add several
missing dependencies (org.apache.aries.proxy, org.apache.aries.util,
org.objectweb.asm, org.objectweb.asm.commons, org.objectweb.asm.tree).
O.
Re: 0.4
Posted by Harald Wellmann <ha...@gmx.de>.
Am 27.06.2011 21:01, schrieb Alasdair Nottingham:
>
> Do you need a release?
>
I've successfully tested OpenJPA enhancement at deployment time using
Aries 0.4-SNAPSHOT and an Equinox 3.7 release candidate. AFAIK, OSGi
weaving hooks are not yet supported in Aries 0.3.
Build time enhancement in OpenJPA is rather a hassle, and now that
Eclipse/Equinox 3.7 has been released, it would be really great to have
a matching Aries release so that users could work with load time
enhancement without depending on any snapshot artifacts of either Aries
or Equinox.
Call it 0.4 or 0.3.1 as you wish ;-) If a partial release of just the
org.apache.aries.jpa.* bundles would do the trick and play together with
the 0.3 release of the other bundles, I'd be just as happy.
Regards,
Harald
Re: 0.4
Posted by Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com>.
OK - I trust you guys...
Just need to know whether I need to update any of my other Aries projects
when I upgrade the JPA part. I'm also using Blueprint, JTA and JNDI (as most
others using JPA I guess). On the Aries web it looks like 0.3 is the latest
version of everything but in Maven central I can see version 0.3.1 (for
Blueprint anyway). So what combination will then be tested?
/Bengt
2011/6/28 Alasdair Nottingham <no...@apache.org>
> Hi,
>
> As pointed out OSGi versioning does help here. We have put the
> infrastructure in place to do distributions which include multiple things
> collected together. I'm not sure if we will do that here though. In general
> the latest releases of things will have been tested together prior to
> release.
>
> Alasdair
>
>
> On 28 June 2011 18:44, Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com> wrote:
>
>> Yeah, I guess you're right. I'm just a little sloppy when it comes to OSGi
>> versioning myself...
>>
>> /Bengt
>>
>>
>> 2011/6/28 Jacek Laskowski <ja...@japila.pl>
>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Now that you seem to release the sub projects independently (which I
>>> guess
>>> > is good since it enables more frequent releases) it is important to
>>> document
>>> > what versions of the different sub projects are compatible with each
>>> other
>>> > (and that they are tested together).
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Isn't what OSGi versioning (for bundles and packages) is supposed to
>>> take care of?
>>>
>>> Jacek
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jacek Laskowski
>>> Java EE, functional languages and IBM WebSphere - http://blog.japila.pl
>>> Warszawa JUG conference = Confitura (formerly Javarsovia) ::
>>> http://confitura.pl
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Alasdair Nottingham
> not@apache.org
>
Re: 0.4
Posted by Alasdair Nottingham <no...@apache.org>.
Hi,
As pointed out OSGi versioning does help here. We have put the
infrastructure in place to do distributions which include multiple things
collected together. I'm not sure if we will do that here though. In general
the latest releases of things will have been tested together prior to
release.
Alasdair
On 28 June 2011 18:44, Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com> wrote:
> Yeah, I guess you're right. I'm just a little sloppy when it comes to OSGi
> versioning myself...
>
> /Bengt
>
>
> 2011/6/28 Jacek Laskowski <ja...@japila.pl>
>
>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Now that you seem to release the sub projects independently (which I
>> guess
>> > is good since it enables more frequent releases) it is important to
>> document
>> > what versions of the different sub projects are compatible with each
>> other
>> > (and that they are tested together).
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Isn't what OSGi versioning (for bundles and packages) is supposed to
>> take care of?
>>
>> Jacek
>>
>> --
>> Jacek Laskowski
>> Java EE, functional languages and IBM WebSphere - http://blog.japila.pl
>> Warszawa JUG conference = Confitura (formerly Javarsovia) ::
>> http://confitura.pl
>>
>
>
--
Alasdair Nottingham
not@apache.org
Re: 0.4
Posted by Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com>.
Yeah, I guess you're right. I'm just a little sloppy when it comes to OSGi
versioning myself...
/Bengt
2011/6/28 Jacek Laskowski <ja...@japila.pl>
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com> wrote:
>
> > Now that you seem to release the sub projects independently (which I
> guess
> > is good since it enables more frequent releases) it is important to
> document
> > what versions of the different sub projects are compatible with each
> other
> > (and that they are tested together).
>
> Hi,
>
> Isn't what OSGi versioning (for bundles and packages) is supposed to
> take care of?
>
> Jacek
>
> --
> Jacek Laskowski
> Java EE, functional languages and IBM WebSphere - http://blog.japila.pl
> Warszawa JUG conference = Confitura (formerly Javarsovia) ::
> http://confitura.pl
>
Re: 0.4
Posted by Harald Wellmann <ha...@gmx.de>.
Am 28.06.2011 17:57, schrieb Jacek Laskowski:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Bengt Rodehav<be...@rodehav.com> wrote:
> Isn't what OSGi versioning (for bundles and packages) is supposed to
> take care of?
Oh yes, the OSGi runtime will complain when there's a version mismatch...
But I'd really like to take care of that in my build process when
writing my POMs, so a module list in the Aries Wiki including compatible
version ranges would help.
Regards,
Harald
Re: 0.4
Posted by Jacek Laskowski <ja...@japila.pl>.
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com> wrote:
> Now that you seem to release the sub projects independently (which I guess
> is good since it enables more frequent releases) it is important to document
> what versions of the different sub projects are compatible with each other
> (and that they are tested together).
Hi,
Isn't what OSGi versioning (for bundles and packages) is supposed to
take care of?
Jacek
--
Jacek Laskowski
Java EE, functional languages and IBM WebSphere - http://blog.japila.pl
Warszawa JUG conference = Confitura (formerly Javarsovia) :: http://confitura.pl
Re: 0.4
Posted by Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com>.
Sounds perfect!
Will you only release the JPA stuff? I guess then that Aries JPA 0.4 is
compatible with 0.3 of the other Aries projects? I currently use the 0.3
versions.
Now that you seem to release the sub projects independently (which I guess
is good since it enables more frequent releases) it is important to document
what versions of the different sub projects are compatible with each other
(and that they are tested together).
/Bengt
2011/6/28 Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org>
> +1 I can help out. I'm looking forward to trying out our new release
> process :-)
>
> Jeremy
>
> On 28 June 2011 11:17, Timothy Ward <ti...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm happy to look at getting a new release of the Aries JPA container.
> There
> > are a couple of hoops to jump through with the build, but now that
> Equinox
> > 3.7 and the OSGi 4.3 API are available it should be possible for us to
> get
> > the build into a release-able state
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Tim
> >
> > ________________________________
> > Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:18:51 +0000
> > Subject: Re: 0.4
> > From: younes.ouadi@gmail.com
> > To: user@aries.apache.org
> >
> > Hello Alasdair,
> > I endorse the point of view of both Bengt and Harald. It will be very
> > interesting to release the enhancement allowing the runtime enhancer.
> This
> > feature is more 'compatible' with the loose-coupling best-practice. Why
> > should my 'entities bundles' know about their JPA Provider?
> > I believe that the big work has been already completed by implementing
> > successfully the run-time enhancer. There is just a small but important
> step
> > that remains: officially offer that important feature to the public.
> > Warm regards.
> >
> > Younes Ouadi
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 8:04 AM, Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for your reply Alasdair,
> > Reading the documentation about the JPA support it seems like in 0.4, it
> is
> > no longer necessary to list all classes in the persistence.xml. That's an
> > improvement I'm really interested in which is why asked about the 0.4
> > release. I also use Karaf+Camel and I'm used to more frequent releases
> than
> > what seems to be the case with Aries.
> > /Bengt
> > 2011/6/27 Alasdair Nottingham <no...@apache.org>
> >
> > Hi,
> > I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have been more
> "on
> > demand".
> > After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release process
> so
> > their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were previously. Some bundles
> > might be at 0.4 and some at 0.3.1.
> > Do you need a release?
> > Alasdair
> >
> > On 24 June 2011 13:04, Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com> wrote:
> >
> > Anyone know when Aries 0.4 is planned for?
> > /Bengt
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Alasdair Nottingham
> > not@apache.org
> >
> >
> >
>
Re: 0.4
Posted by Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org>.
+1 I can help out. I'm looking forward to trying out our new release process :-)
Jeremy
On 28 June 2011 11:17, Timothy Ward <ti...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm happy to look at getting a new release of the Aries JPA container. There
> are a couple of hoops to jump through with the build, but now that Equinox
> 3.7 and the OSGi 4.3 API are available it should be possible for us to get
> the build into a release-able state
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim
>
> ________________________________
> Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:18:51 +0000
> Subject: Re: 0.4
> From: younes.ouadi@gmail.com
> To: user@aries.apache.org
>
> Hello Alasdair,
> I endorse the point of view of both Bengt and Harald. It will be very
> interesting to release the enhancement allowing the runtime enhancer. This
> feature is more 'compatible' with the loose-coupling best-practice. Why
> should my 'entities bundles' know about their JPA Provider?
> I believe that the big work has been already completed by implementing
> successfully the run-time enhancer. There is just a small but important step
> that remains: officially offer that important feature to the public.
> Warm regards.
>
> Younes Ouadi
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 8:04 AM, Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for your reply Alasdair,
> Reading the documentation about the JPA support it seems like in 0.4, it is
> no longer necessary to list all classes in the persistence.xml. That's an
> improvement I'm really interested in which is why asked about the 0.4
> release. I also use Karaf+Camel and I'm used to more frequent releases than
> what seems to be the case with Aries.
> /Bengt
> 2011/6/27 Alasdair Nottingham <no...@apache.org>
>
> Hi,
> I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have been more "on
> demand".
> After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release process so
> their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were previously. Some bundles
> might be at 0.4 and some at 0.3.1.
> Do you need a release?
> Alasdair
>
> On 24 June 2011 13:04, Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com> wrote:
>
> Anyone know when Aries 0.4 is planned for?
> /Bengt
>
>
>
> --
> Alasdair Nottingham
> not@apache.org
>
>
>
RE: 0.4
Posted by Timothy Ward <ti...@apache.org>.
Hi,
I'm happy to look at getting a new release of the Aries JPA container. There are a couple of hoops to jump through with the build, but now that Equinox 3.7 and the OSGi 4.3 API are available it should be possible for us to get the build into a release-able state
Regards,
Tim
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:18:51 +0000
Subject: Re: 0.4
From: younes.ouadi@gmail.com
To: user@aries.apache.org
Hello Alasdair,
I endorse the point of view of both Bengt and Harald. It will be very interesting to release the enhancement allowing the runtime enhancer. This feature is more 'compatible' with the loose-coupling best-practice. Why should my 'entities bundles' know about their JPA Provider?
I believe that the big work has been already completed by implementing successfully the run-time enhancer. There is just a small but important step that remains: officially offer that important feature to the public.
Warm regards.
Younes Ouadi
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 8:04 AM, Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com> wrote:
Thanks for your reply Alasdair,
Reading the documentation about the JPA support it seems like in 0.4, it is no longer necessary to list all classes in the persistence.xml. That's an improvement I'm really interested in which is why asked about the 0.4 release. I also use Karaf+Camel and I'm used to more frequent releases than what seems to be the case with Aries.
/Bengt
2011/6/27 Alasdair Nottingham <no...@apache.org>
Hi,
I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have been more "on demand".
After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release process so their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were previously. Some bundles might be at 0.4 and some at 0.3.1.
Do you need a release?
Alasdair
On 24 June 2011 13:04, Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com> wrote:
Anyone know when Aries 0.4 is planned for?
/Bengt
--
Alasdair Nottingham
not@apache.org
Re: 0.4
Posted by Younes Ouadi <yo...@gmail.com>.
Hello Alasdair,
I endorse the point of view of both Bengt and Harald. It will be very
interesting to release the enhancement allowing the runtime enhancer. This
feature is more 'compatible' with the loose-coupling best-practice. Why
should my 'entities bundles' know about their JPA Provider?
I believe that the big work has been already completed by implementing
successfully the run-time enhancer. There is just a small but important step
that remains: officially offer that important feature to the public.
Warm regards.
Younes Ouadi
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 8:04 AM, Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com> wrote:
> Thanks for your reply Alasdair,
>
> Reading the documentation about the JPA support it seems like in 0.4, it is
> no longer necessary to list all classes in the persistence.xml. That's an
> improvement I'm really interested in which is why asked about the 0.4
> release. I also use Karaf+Camel and I'm used to more frequent releases than
> what seems to be the case with Aries.
>
> /Bengt
>
> 2011/6/27 Alasdair Nottingham <no...@apache.org>
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have been more
>> "on demand".
>>
>> After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release process
>> so their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were previously. Some bundles
>> might be at 0.4 and some at 0.3.1.
>>
>> Do you need a release?
>>
>> Alasdair
>>
>>
>> On 24 June 2011 13:04, Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Anyone know when Aries 0.4 is planned for?
>>>
>>> /Bengt
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Alasdair Nottingham
>> not@apache.org
>>
>
>
Re: 0.4
Posted by Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com>.
Thanks for your reply Alasdair,
Reading the documentation about the JPA support it seems like in 0.4, it is
no longer necessary to list all classes in the persistence.xml. That's an
improvement I'm really interested in which is why asked about the 0.4
release. I also use Karaf+Camel and I'm used to more frequent releases than
what seems to be the case with Aries.
/Bengt
2011/6/27 Alasdair Nottingham <no...@apache.org>
> Hi,
>
> I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have been more
> "on demand".
>
> After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release process so
> their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were previously. Some bundles
> might be at 0.4 and some at 0.3.1.
>
> Do you need a release?
>
> Alasdair
>
>
> On 24 June 2011 13:04, Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com> wrote:
>
>> Anyone know when Aries 0.4 is planned for?
>>
>> /Bengt
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Alasdair Nottingham
> not@apache.org
>
Re: 0.4
Posted by Alasdair Nottingham <no...@apache.org>.
Hi,
I don't think there are any "plans". In the past releases have been more "on
demand".
After the 0.3 release we decided to move to a pre-bundle release process so
their wont be a big 0.4 release like there were previously. Some bundles
might be at 0.4 and some at 0.3.1.
Do you need a release?
Alasdair
On 24 June 2011 13:04, Bengt Rodehav <be...@rodehav.com> wrote:
> Anyone know when Aries 0.4 is planned for?
>
> /Bengt
>
--
Alasdair Nottingham
not@apache.org