On Apr 17, 2009, at 11:29 PM, Tatu Saloranta wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Richard Wallace
> <rwallace1979_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 9:07 AM, Tatu Saloranta
>> <tsaloranta_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 8:54 AM, Richard Wallace <rwallace1979_at_gmail.com
>>> > wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> Anyways, even if the Jersey OSGi integration isn't perfect I don't
>>>> think you should throw the baby out with the bath water with the
>>>> jersey-bundle jar and remove all the manifest headers.
>>>
>>> I agree. For other projects I'm involved with, OSGi headers are
>>> added
>>> even if services-introspection isn't available: you can still
>>> instantiate implementation directly, or using injection-dependency
>>> framework.
>>>
>>>> I'm also curious if you guys ever tried something like is
>>>> mentioned in
>>>> this blog <http://gnodet.blogspot.com/2008/05/jee-specs-in-osgi.html
>>>> >.
>>>> I know it was brought up on the list before, but it doesn't seem
>>>> like
>>>> anything came of it. If you'd like I can try patching Jersey and
>>>> see
>>>
>>> For me the best suggestion (from comments there was) using a simple
>>> OSGi-services based solution. But that needs at least de facto
>>> standard between implementations of specific standard; and ideally a
>>> standard from within JSR in question.
>>> With Stax, for example, I did implement OSGi services based
>>> alternative included in Stax2 extensions (so far implemented by
>>> Woodstox and Aalto), and that was rather straight-forward. But the
>>> next step (settling on one approach, standardizing it) is the hard
>>> part.
>>>
>>
>> Well, I think it would be nice to at least get something going for
>> Jersey. After that we can figure out how to get it standardized and
>> get other implementations using it - let's just take it one step at a
>> time. :)
>
> Fully agreed.
>
Logged issue:
https://jersey.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=275
so i do not forgot :-)
Paul.
>> As I said, I'm about to head out on vacation but I'll take a look at
>> it in more detail when I get back. Which comment is it that you're
>> talking about, the one from Christian Schneider? Can you provide
>
> Yes.
>
>> links to the work you did for Stax?
>
> It's trivially simple, Stax2 API is included withing woodstox repo, so
> javadocs at:
>
> http://woodstox.codehaus.org/4.0.3/javadoc/index.html
>
> and specifically package "org.codehaus.stax2.osgi",
> [http://woodstox.codehaus.org/4.0.3/javadoc/org/codehaus/stax2/osgi/package-frame.html
> ]
>
> are all there is. Plus trivial implementation of course.
>
> I suspect there may be better ways, and/or the whole concept could be
> further generalized, but seems simple enough.
>
> Getting Jersey to work bit better on 'generic' OSGi would be great.
>
> -+ Tatu +-
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_jersey.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_jersey.dev.java.net
>