[slf4j-dev] "Metadata Advice"

[ceki]

Hi Martin,


Yes, there is a cyclic dependency between the SLF4J API and impls
which is frowned upon by the OSGi community. Proposals for better OSGi
integration are most welcome subject to backward compatibility
restrictions. (Given the wide use of SLF4J we have to be extra-careful
not to break compatibility).

Thus, modifying the manifest files should probably be OK while changes
in package structure or in classes not OK.

Have you looked at previous discussions of the subject? See for
example:

   http://bugzilla.slf4j.org/show_bug.cgi?id=75
   http://bugzilla.slf4j.org/show_bug.cgi?id=283

Thank you in advance for your suggestions,

-- 
Ceki
65% of statistics are made up on the spot

On 23.01.2013 12:07, Martin Ellis wrote:
> Hi Ceki and others,
>
> I thought you might be interested to know about "Metadata Advice":
> it's an outreach project by folk involved in the OSGi community, who
> are willing to offer advice to people trying to package their software
> so it behaves well in an OSGi environment.
>
> http://blog.osgi.org/2013/01/get-help-adding-osgi-metadata-to-your.html
>
> Since there's been talk on this list of problems due to cyclic
> dependencies between slf4j-api and the logging implementations, I
> thought I'd point it out. Although it's called "Metadata Advice", I
> think  they're willing to offer some suggestions for other aspects of
> using OSGi, beyond simply adding manifest headers (which slf4j already
> has).
>
> Perhaps it's worth creating an issue on their bugzilla inviting
> suggestions for improving OSGi support in slf4j?
>
> Regards,
> Martin