[PAX WEB] - refactorings and aliases

[Achim Nierbeck]

Hi,

in another thread I've just seen a lot of discussion about aliases etc.

If you think of refactoring Pax Web, please make sure you're able to verify Pax Web vs. the OSGi TCK.

Cause the current basis has been checked to work with the OSGi specification at the time when working on it. Luckily we had someone who was able to get a hold of the TCK at the time.

He did some verification. Therefore I highly recommend to be very cautious about changing to much of the underlying Http and Web services, all of them have been proven to be valid according to the OSGi spec (which at the time has been 4.3, I believe)

thanks, Achim

--

Apache Member

Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer & Project Lead
blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>

Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS>

[Grzegorz Grzybek]

Hi Achim

pt., 7 lut 2020 o 14:34 'Achim Nierbeck' via OPS4J <op...@googlegroups.com> napisał(a):

Hi,

in another thread I've just seen a lot of discussion about aliases etc.

If you think of refactoring Pax Web, please make sure you're able to verify Pax Web vs. the OSGi TCK.

Cause the current basis has been checked to work with the OSGi specification at the time when working on it. Luckily we had someone who was able to get a hold of the TCK at the time.

He did some verification. Therefore I highly recommend to be very cautious about changing to much of the underlying Http and Web services, all of them have been proven to be valid according to the OSGi spec (which at the time has been 4.3, I believe)

I saw so many changes (also related to R6 support) that I'm pretty sure that this compliance is long gone ;) But I may be wrong. Anyway - I'll do my best to do as little changes as possible.

Definitely Pax Web is NOT R6 Whiteboard compliant (can't handle osgi.http.whiteboard.context.select=(osgi.http.whiteboard.context.httpservice=*) kind of context selection).

Do you know how to get access to TCK? I'd be more than happy to be able to run it (also for Pax Logging!)

regards

Grzegorz

 

thanks, Achim

--

Apache Member

Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer & Project Lead
blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>

Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS>

--
--
------------------
OPS4J - http://www.ops4j.org - op...@googlegroups.com

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OPS4J" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ops4j+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ops4j/CAD0r13dNhcrz65mpSiv_Zjd7P3p5f1VxvDJ9PJrwj44QWHP4iw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Achim Nierbeck]

Hi Grzegorz,

as I said, it's been 4.x compliant, for 6 I never was able to get a hold of the TCK.

At the time beeing a friend of the project made the tests, and gave me the results so I could fix them.

As the TCK needs to be paid for, it's not really possible to get a hold of them.

regards, Achim

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ops4j/CAAdXmhpxD4FOyn16bPBe7HkJCTKYq%2BnLnH7-gMhuZad-AgM18w%40mail.gmail.com.

[Grzegorz Grzybek]

pt., 7 lut 2020 o 15:43 'Achim Nierbeck' via OPS4J <op...@googlegroups.com> napisał(a):

Hi Grzegorz,

as I said, it's been 4.x compliant, for 6 I never was able to get a hold of the TCK.

At the time beeing a friend of the project made the tests, and gave me the results so I could fix them.

As the TCK needs to be paid for, it's not really possible to get a hold of them.

:( so all we can do is reading the specification 100 times (I already read it 70 times)

regards

Grzegorz

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ops4j/CAD0r13f_CKnapgWU-8u0OstY%2BL-6yuMEricYX%2BjUsNjbGk1Rsg%40mail.gmail.com.