Skip to content
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

OSGi Manifest for engine #1277

Open
stbischof opened this issue Nov 9, 2022 · 1 comment
Open

OSGi Manifest for engine #1277

stbischof opened this issue Nov 9, 2022 · 1 comment
Labels
distribution Issues related to packaging up Rhino

Comments

@stbischof
Copy link

stbischof commented Nov 9, 2022

"Automatic-Module-Name": "org.mozilla.rhino.engine"

could you please add a OSGI-Entries intomanifest to the engine bundle?

            "Bundle-ManifestVersion": "2",
            "Bundle-SymbolicName": "org.mozilla.rhino-engine",
            "Bundle-Version": project.version.replaceAll("-.*", ""),
            "Export-Package": "org.mozilla.javascript.engine",
            "Import-Package": "javax.script,org.mozilla.javascript"

if gradle should do the job bnd hast a great plugin to do this
Example here: https://github.com/osgi/osgi-test/tree/main/examples/osgi-test-example-gradle

@p-bakker
Copy link
Collaborator

@gbrail

From #1479 (comment)

We CAN add an OSGi manifest, but this PR introduces proper Java modules that meet all the rules of Java modularity. If people also want OSGi we can add it. Is that still necessary if we add modules?

From a little reading I did, having the OSGI stuff inside the jars is still usefull/needed if you want to make use of the additional features that osgi layers on top of JPMS:

If you want to use OSGi's dynamic module management, service registry, or other OSGi-specific features, then you need to add the necessary OSGi metadata to your JAR files

So I think merging #1278 is useful

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
distribution Issues related to packaging up Rhino
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants