[OBR] Requirement of being extended

[Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>]

WIth the extender pattern being more and more used, I think bundle
repository is missing a way to express.
I'm wondering about defining a new namespace for that.

A blueprint bundle would have a requirement:
     <requirement name="extender"
filter="(&(extender=org.osgi.service.blueprint)(version>=1.0.0))" />

While a blueprint extender would have the following capability:
     <capability name="extender">
       <p n="extender" v="org.osgi.service.blueprint"/>
       <p n="version" v="1.0.0" />
     </capability>

Thoughts ?

-- 
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com

Re: [OBR] Requirement of being extended

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

On 3/5/10 9:20, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> WIth the extender pattern being more and more used, I think bundle
> repository is missing a way to express.
> I'm wondering about defining a new namespace for that.
>
> A blueprint bundle would have a requirement:
>       <requirement name="extender"
> filter="(&(extender=org.osgi.service.blueprint)(version>=1.0.0))" />
>
> While a blueprint extender would have the following capability:
>       <capability name="extender">
>         <p n="extender" v="org.osgi.service.blueprint"/>
>         <p n="version" v="1.0.0" />
>       </capability>
>
> Thoughts ?
>    

This is the whole point of having a generic capability/requirement 
model, you can model whatever you want.

We should be cognizant of the fact that we are defining a non-standard 
namespace, though, and should like do something like reverse domain 
naming to avoid potential collisions. In the future, it may be possible 
that OSGi defines a standard namespace for extenders.

-> richard