[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [equinox-dev] Support for RFC 119

> Thanks to whoever did that!

You're welcome :-)

>   Should I open an enhancement request to add a REMOTE type and attach a
> patch to contribute an addition/change? (e.g.):

I will open a bug in OSGi to fix that. In the interim just use the numerical value 5.

> One question:  does this framework change appear somewhere else in the
> r4.2 spec? (i.e. other than 119)?  As it seems to imply that RFC 119
> isn't stand-alone (that is, it requires this small addition to framework).

119 relies on come changes in 4.2 (e.g. ServiceHooks). ServiceException is one of them.

>   Are there conventions about this (placement) that dictate what
> package(s) these interfaces should be in?  If so, where is that?

These should already be in one of the jars from OSGi. Tom?


BJ Hargrave
Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM
OSGi Fellow and CTO of the
OSGi Alliance

office: +1 386 848 1781
mobile: +1 386 848 3788