On Tue, 2010-04-27 at 09:54 +0100, Eoghan Glynn wrote:
> - the api package is now a 'bundle' ... so, a bundle
is just a jar
> with some extra stuff in MANIFEST.MF ... what would happen if we
> wanted to add some other metadata to the manifest? Just a
> theoretical question, but it seems a little wrong that our core
> would be a bundle just for the sake of the cli.
Well the general principal is that conversion to a bundle should be
non-intrusive. OK the manifest has been decorated with some extra info,
but these extra manifest headers are simply ignored anytime the bundle
is used as a plain ol' jar, e.g. within a webapp WEB-INF/lib.
So really the jar becomes a bit more useful, in the sense that it may
now be deployed directly to OGSi, without really impacting on any
existing usage scenario.
Yeah.
That said however, I could always just wrap the api jar as a dynamic
bundle (same approach as I took with the RESTeasy provider jars) if
you'd be more comfortable with that?
Ah no - I was just making the point that you've had to change the
packaging type from 'jar' to 'bundle' in the POM. If we wanted the jar
to be an 'ejb' (just an example) package too, we'd be stuck, right?
It's not a problem, I guess I'm just commenting on maven itself, not
your change
Cheers,
Mark.