felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <Ralph.Go...@dslextreme.com>
Subject Re: Felix Commons
Date Thu, 04 Oct 2007 03:18:55 GMT
Pardon me for butting in and I might be way of base, but perhaps the 
problem could be solved in a different way?  If I understand correctly, 
the issue with bundles is that they might contain 3rd party jars with 
licenses that are incompatible with Apache?  If so, could they be 
packaged at apache without the 3rd party jars but then be installed into 
a user's local repository using a Maven plugin that repackages them to 
include the jars?


Rob Walker wrote:
> To me - the difficult issue is the one Richard nails "maintaining a 
> large bundle repository"
> The problem is, I'd say, some bundles have a very common utility and 
> wide use e.g. log, http etc. For those we'll likely get helpers to 
> look after them, as is the case now. But many bundles are components 
> that are key to only some applications - so the pool of people to 
> maintain them will be smaller i.e. those with an interest and 
> knowledge in that application space. Even with Http we find this a 
> little - there's a few of us who try and look after it because we use 
> it in specific parts of our applications, but we're not always the 
> best people to know all about Http serving even if we had the time to 
> devote.
> Seems to me - we need to make it as easy, worthwhile and encouraging 
> as possible for anyone to be a bundle maintainer - either long term, 
> or even for a short period whilst it fits naturally with their job or 
> application needs.
> OBR seems like a decent way to start in that - something that's 
> accessible, easy for people to contribute too, and doesn't have too 
> much red tape.
> Just my 10c
> -- Rob
> Richard S. Hall wrote:
>> I had a thought that I wanted to run by people...
>> Since there is some consternation about what to do with Felix Commons 
>> (i.e., whether or not to release bundles or just release POM files), 
>> what about the possibility of just releasing POM files, but releasing 
>> the actual JAR files independently of Apache?
>> For example, with the new OBR plugin we could easily create an OBR 
>> repo that someone could place at a third-party site, e.g., the 
>> original OBR Source Forge site.
>> I am not sure if this would be muddying the waters or not, but the 
>> effort to do this would clearly have to be outside of the Apache 
>> mandate (i.e., an independent effort). For example, if we did decide 
>> to release POMs, then nothing could stop a third party from creating 
>> real bundles and making them available on a web site, right? So, this 
>> could work in a similar fashion.
>> The rationale for doing something like this is that it seems like we 
>> as a community do not have man power or perhaps will power (for good 
>> reason) to be responsible for maintaining a large bundle repository.
>> Of course, if the mere act of releasing a POM encompasses as much 
>> need for oversight as a bundle JAR file, then this approach wouldn't 
>> save us much either.
>> Any thoughts from people with more knowledge than myself on such topics?
>> -> richard

View raw message