-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 46
More than one event should be allowed in case of coordinated delete #719
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
|
@laeubi please update also the spec. |
chrisrueger
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
left some comments.
org.osgi.test.cases.cm/src/org/osgi/test/cases/cm/junit/CMCoordinationTestCase.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
org.osgi.test.cases.cm/src/org/osgi/test/cases/cm/junit/CMCoordinationTestCase.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Fix osgi#718 Signed-off-by: Christoph Läubrich <[email protected]>
|
I tried to address the comments and adjusted the spec here is the generated specification: osgi.cmpn-8.1.0.pdf |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
- I like the clarifications in the testcase.
- I suggested a small typo correction
I just comment (instead of approve) because I don't feel I am qualified enough to judge this, since I was late in the game. But it sounds reasonable and makes sense to me.
|
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. Given the limited bandwidth of the team, it will be closed if no further activity occurs. If you intend to work on this pull request, please reopen the PR. Thank you for your contributions. |
|
Still an issue ... |
|
lets bring this up next spec call. |
|
This is how it is implemented in Equinox ATM see: |
|
@stbischof @tjwatson I think we have already agreed on this in the spec call can we proceed here? |
Fix #718