[adrian.brock]

On a related issue, I don't think osgi-services belong in the MC project anyway.

There is an osgi-int project that provides the core platform.

The extra services work should be in a seperate OSGi standalone
project that builds upon the MC base implementation.

I'm happy during the initial development for this to remain in the MC project.

[kconner]

Not varia. Varia is a bad idea in JBossAS and a bad idea here.

Given the structures already discussed, what would you prefer to see? Would you prefer the first one which was proposed or a different one altogether?

It's easy to move these around.

[kconner]

On a related issue, I don't think osgi-services belong in the MC project anyway.

There is an osgi-int project that provides the core platform.

These aren't intended to be service implementations, only the APIs which are required by the osgi-int module.

They should reside in a different project though.

[adrian.brock]

I don't really care. Just so long as there isn't somewhere that less diligent committers think
they put any old shit. :-)

[kconner]

rofl. Okay, will take care of it tomorrow morning.

[alesj]

They should reside in a different project though.

Yes, maybe we can still exploit the 'old' osgi project under jbossas/projects for such things - as Scott already did, but I proposed him to move this ... mea culpa, mea culpa :-(.

We can have such stuff there + some additional wrapper (around existing JBoss services) implementations of other services or some other osgi specific stuff.

And we should only need to link the jar back to MC, as we did with other JBoss specific stuff - common, test, profile, ...

[vickyk]

I can see the rfc(http://www2.osgi.org/div/rfc-0112_BundleRepository.pdf) specifies the following package
org.osgi.servicex.obr but I see the implementation with the package structure
org.osgi.service.obr at here
https://anonsvn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/projects/jboss-osgi/trunk/osgi-repository-api/src/main/java/org/osgi/service/obr
Why is there such difference?

[alesj]

"vickyk" wrote:
Why is there such difference?

You mean the missing 'x'?
Dunno who initially created those packages,
but this should be minor detail if it's wrong. ;-)

[vickyk]

"alesj" wrote:

"vickyk" wrote:
Why is there such difference?

You mean the missing 'x'?

Yes, the missing x-"extension" ;)