Re: [equinox-dev] Replacement for PackageAdmin.getBundles

["Richard S. Hall" <heavy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2/22/11 12:48, Neil Bartlett wrote:
> Hi Richard and BJ,
>
> I know the PackageAdmin is optional. Pragmatically though it's been
> present in every framework for so long that it's availability is
> assumed. I'm guilty myself of simply getting it as a service without
> null-checking the result, and I'm sure a lot of production code out
> there does the same.

But the framework cannot be bound by faulty code...

-> richard

> Cheers
> Neil
>
> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Richard S. Hall<heavy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
> > On 2/22/11 12:19, Richard S. Hall wrote:
> > > On 2/22/11 12:12, Thomas Watson wrote:
> > > > No, package admin may not be available on all future framework
> > > > implementations of R4.3. I have no plans to remove it from equinox because I
> > > > know it is used by many clients and I don't want to break them. I would hope
> > > > that most framework implementations would have the same concern and will
> > > > keep an implementation of PackageAdmin around for a long time.
> > > >
> > > > I'm not sure I understand the seriousness of this "breaking change"
> > > > though. There is an alternative way of doing this as BJ suggests. Also,
> > > > PackageAdmin may have been a mandatory core service in OSGi R4.2
> > > > specification, but it has not always been so. Previous releases of the core
> > > > specifications made the PackageAdmin service optional. Although I don't
> > > > think there is any reasonable core framework implementation available that
> > > > does not provide PackageAdmin at the moment.
> > > I guess I didn't even remember making them mandatory...the R4.2 spec still
> > > has sentences like this:
> > >
> > > "For example, a Framework vendor could supply the
> > > optional services like Permission Admin service and Start Level service
> > > with
> > > Framework extension bundles."
> > Sorry, I read "Permission Admin" as "Package Admin", but I'm still trying to
> > see in the spec where it says Package Admin is mandatory. See this in 7.1.3:
> >
> > "The Framework’s system bundle should provide a Package Admin service
> > for the Management Agent."
> >
> > ->  richard
> >
> > > ->  richard
> > >
> > > > Tom
> > > >
> > > > -----equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: -----
> > > >
> > > > To: Equinox development mailing list<equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > From: Neil Bartlett<njbartlett@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Sent by: equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Date: 02/22/2011 10:46AM
> > > > Cc: Equinox development mailing list<equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Subject: Re: [equinox-dev] Replacement for PackageAdmin.getBundles
> > > >
> > > > BJ, could you confirm that the old API will still be available in
> > > > all frameworks... otherwise this would be a serious breaking
> > > > change for existing clients.
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my BlackBerry
> > > >
> > > > On 22 Feb 2011, at 16:09, BJ Hargrave<hargrave@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > > <mailto:hargrave@xxxxxxxxxx>>  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > There is no replacement for that method. You can just grovel over
> > > > > the bundles to find this information. Seems like a job for a
> > > > > utility class...
> > > > >
> > > > > That method was not a good fit for packageadmin anyway since it
> > > > > nothing to do with the wiring state of the bundles.
> > > > > -- *BJ Hargrave*
> > > > > Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM
> > > > > OSGi Fellow and CTO of the _OSGi Alliance_<http://www.osgi.org/>_
> > > > > __hargrave@xxxxxx.com_<mailto:hargrave@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >
> > > > > office: +1 386 848 1781
> > > > > mobile: +1 386 848 3788
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > From: Gunnar Wagenknecht<gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > <mailto:gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
> > > > > To: equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Date: 2011/02/22 07:08
> > > > > Subject: [equinox-dev] Replacement for PackageAdmin.getBundles
> > > > > Sent by: equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > <mailto:equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > What's the recommended replacement for
> > > > > org.osgi.service.packageadmin.PackageAdmin.getBundles(String,
> > > > > String)? I
> > > > > was looking for a similar method in the new org.osgi.framework.wiring
> > > > > package. But it appears that there is none. I haven't checked the
> > > > > changes for M6, though.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Gunnar
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -- Gunnar Wagenknecht
> > > > > gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > http://wagenknecht.org/
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > equinox-dev mailing list
> > > > > equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > equinox-dev mailing list
> > > > > equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > equinox-dev mailing list
> > > > equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > equinox-dev mailing list
> > > > equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > equinox-dev mailing list
> > > equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
> > _______________________________________________
> > equinox-dev mailing list
> > equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev