-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 137
#1304 add missing osgi capability info for spifly injection #1306
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: release-3.1.x
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
|
Any comments @jansupol ? |
|
I'm still in the process of intergrating this into our application, so I might identify an additional capability that needs to be added, yet for my unit tests the as-is does work! |
|
I do not understand this too much. I am not against this, but the description of the OSGi headers is unclear to me. Jakarta REST and Jersey are used in GlassFish OSGi and Felix OSGi and these fields do not seem to be mandatory there. But other OSGi frameworks may behave differently. Anyway, |
|
I suppose jakartaee:release-3.1.x is not the right branch to create this PR. |
So I'm trying to describe it the way I understand this - If I get it wrong, please correct it: We are using Eclipse Equinox (it's an Eclipse RCP application), which uses Apache Felix DS for Osgi Services. Your services are not picked up, as you either need entries in I don't know how Glassfish in combination with Felix does the injection, but for my scenario it works this way:
My log shows this on startup If I deactivate spifly or remove the Provide/Require-Capability, then this happens @jansupol I can certainly refactor the PR and provide it for the right branch - just give me the directions! |
|
I added a PR for main branch in #1308 with some more documentation |
The reason I did this, is that my targetet production env uses 3.1 and I could straight test it. I also would need a backport for this then to 3.1 |
So far we never provided a release of an older version of the API, if I can recall correctly. I hoped someone would chime in to point us to the 3.1 development branch, but release- looks more like a technical branch for the release. Perhaps we would need to create a new branch from a tag? |
See #1304