Closed bjhargrave closed 15 years ago
Comment author: Stoyan Boshev <s.boshev@prosyst.com>
What shall be the default namespace in CD XML from now on? I guess it shall be the v1.1.0. Probably this has to be mentioned in the RFC and in the spec.
Do we have to define what would be the behavior of SCR when there is a mixture of v1.0 and v1.1 components? I think SCR has to log an error when components defined with namespace v.1.0 are taking advantage of features introduced in v1.1. SCR must handle v1.0 components exactly the same way as it works now. This is for the sake of backward compatibility. Perhaps these clarifications should be put in the spec.
Comment author: @bjhargrave
CPEG call: Assign to BJ to add some text to the spec.
Comment author: @bjhargrave
Updated spec in r6462.
Version 1.1 of DS spec will mandate the use of the v1.1.0 name space to access version 1.1 features. From updated section 112.4.2:
"Use of the name space for component descriptions is mandatory. [...] If an XML document contains a single, root component element which does not specify a name space, then the http://www.osgi.org/xmlns/scr/v1.0.0 name space is assumed. Component descriptions using the http://www.osgi.org/xmlns/scr/v1.0.0 name space must be treated according to version 1.0 of this specification."
The additional signatures and additional accessibility for the activate, deactivate, bind and unbind methods can cause problems for components written to version 1.0 of this specification. The behavior in the version 1.1 specification only applies to component descriptions using the v1.1.0 name space.
All component description examples in the spec were updated to use the v1.1.0 name space as well as some of the new signatures and accessibility.
Original bug ID: BZ#934 From: Stoyan Boshev <s.boshev@prosyst.com> Reported version: R4 V4.2