2014-08-25 23:55 GMT+02:00 Hardy Ferentschik <ha...@hibernate.org>: > > On 25 Jan 2014, at 18:37, Steve Ebersole <st...@hibernate.org> wrote: > > > This is all certainly true. I think specifically of things like > > persisters, which by "package break down" are currently considered API. > > > > Also, as far as OSGi, I would suggest not worrying about that so much > > (Gunnar). Keep in mind that even today this OSGi manifest info is > > generated by build logic. Changing that build logic to look at > annotations > > rather that parsing .class file path is not that big of a deal imo. > > Devil's-in-the-details of course, but in theory it should not be a big > > deal. > > I agree that the generation of the OSGi metadata via annotation would not > be such a big > problem, however, OSGi does afaik not allow to configure modules on a > class level. The > fines granularity on what is exported is on package level. Just saying. >
Right, AFAICS the granularity in OSGi (what concerns exporting/importing APIs but also versioning) is the package. I don't think exporting single types within a package while not exporting others is possible. > —Hardy > > > _______________________________________________ > hibernate-dev mailing list > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev > _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
