| Status of plugin.xml in Eclipse 3.0 in respect to OSGi bundle manifest [message #259767] |
Thu, 08 July 2004 11:58  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hello,
I have a question regarding the status of the plugin.xml and OSGI Manifest file:
I've noticed that some of the platform and sdk plugins in 3.0 only place extension
information inside the plugin.xml and everything else in the META-INT/MANIFEST.MF,
and other plugins place everything into the plugin.xml and don't use MANIFEST.MF at all.
The plugin.xml-Editor and the platform seem to handle this transparently.
So, will I have the choice for all times how to split this, or is the plugin.xml a sort
of 'deprecated' in the future?
Regards,
Peter Schaich
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Status of plugin.xml in Eclipse 3.0 in respect to OSGi bundle manifest [message #260834 is a reply to message #259958] |
Mon, 12 July 2004 14:02  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: chaves.nospam.inf.ufsc.br.ok
Eclipse added the concept of *provided* packages to OSGi, which is
expected to be incorporated into the OSGi spec in the near future.
Provided packages correspond to package filters specified in the runtime
section of plug-in manifests (however there is no wildcard support - one
has to explicitly enumerate all packages to be provided). If A requires B,
A will have access to all public types declared in the packages explicitly
provided by B.
Exported packages have always been part of OSGi and are a different story.
They are only seen by plug-ins *importing* packages (instead of requiring
other plug-ins). They are globally available, and for every exported
package, there will be only one plug-in (or bundle, in OSGi) providing it
(if more than one are available, one will be picked). If C and D export
package foo, and E imports it, E (and C and D) will get the classes in
package foo provided by either C or D (note that when you export a
package, you implicitly import it as well).
The OSGi spec is available from osgi.org. Also, the equinox newsgroup and
mailing list are good places to learn more about new opportunities now
available with the move to OSGi.
HTH,
Rafael
Ian Phillips wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
> > Also, there are features that are/will be only available to plugins that
> > provide their own bundle manifests (such as exporting/importing packages).
> I've noticed docs about this, maybe you can help shed some light on this
> for me. How does exporting a package in the bundle manifest differ from a
> <runtime>
> <library name="myplugin.jar">
> <export name="org.ianp.myplugin.*"/>
> </library>
> </runtime>
> section in a plugin.xml file.
> Cheers,
> Ian.
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.24351 seconds
Home