Re: [equinox-dev] OSGI Bundles: alternate manifest.mf location

[Niclas Hedhman <niclas@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Friday 07 July 2006 19:10, Peter Kriens wrote:
> It would be interesting to know how many people on this
> list would like to be able to do something before launching/packaging
> and get rid of the project==bundle constraint?

Generally, I am personally Ok with 1:1 and did so long before I used OSGi. I 
think the developer community at large is fairly divided on the issue, and I 
don't want to get into a religious war over it.
Maven is also following the 1:1 in general, although it can have multiple 
outputs of different types.

I think that the idea that Manifest.MF must be a non-copied file, is pure 
non-sense, result of a historical heritage and possibly in-grained into the 
codebase so much it is hard/expensive to change (which of course is a valid 
point). The .project file could contain the information of such, just like 
source dirs and output destination.

Having a single 'target' directory where all derived material ends up is IMHO 
even better than the single source, as it allows me to manipulate the source 
prior to committing it into the final artifacts, for instance BuildTime and 
Version manifest headers. It is also extremely clear what is source and not.

OTOH, don't listen to me, because I don't use Eclipse :o) Instead, I let my 
Maven system build the Manifest.mf and place that into the META-INF/ (where 
PDE expects) it instead, for the developers in my group who still prefers 
Eclipse.



Cheers
Niclas