felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Richard S. Hall" <he...@ungoverned.org>
Subject Re: http.jetty based on Jetty 6
Date Sun, 13 Jan 2008 05:01:05 GMT
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On Thursday 10 January 2008 23:09, Richard S. Hall wrote:
>> There is no attempt by any of our sub-projects to specifically tie
>> themselves to the Felix framework as far as I am aware. I think we want
>> all of our work to be interoperable where possible, so I think this is a
>> non-issue.
> Yes, that is a good goal and I salute that. In general, we are more often than 
> not met with positive comments when trying to resolve cross-platform issues.
> But, I was thinking more "mentality-wise". People who use KF, first go and 
> check the KF's set of bundles, the Equinox-based folks will search the 
> Eclipse site first... and so on. 
> Why is that? Because the KF developed bundles are tested on KF only, the 
> Eclipse stuff is practically only tested on Equinox and so forth. This sends 
> the signal that it is a "safer bet" to choose from within the same community. 
> It's all in our heads!

I am fairly certain we have sub-projects that test against other 
frameworks too.

> At OPS4J we *try* to ensure that everything gets tested on all the frameworks 
> we claim to support. And with Pax Runner, we try to force all the frameworks 
> into a configuration that is as close to each other as possible... 
> End of the day, I think we want to remain "un-associated" with a framework, 
> and a strong cross-framework interoperability focus. I think it will benefit 
> us all.

As long as we act like this is a distinct goal, then it makes it so.

-> richard

> Cheers

View raw message