felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stuart McCulloch" <stuart.mccull...@jayway.net>
Subject Re: Compatibility claims (Was: Re: http.jetty based on Jetty 6)
Date Wed, 06 Feb 2008 16:48:08 GMT
On 07/02/2008, Richard S. Hall <heavy@ungoverned.org> wrote:
>
> Again, I am still unclear why there is this implicit acceptance among
> some to just assume that it makes sense for others to view our
> subprojects as tainted by our framework. However, rather than argue the
> merits of that, I would rather think about how to address it.
>
> The only idea I have is two-fold:
>
>    1. Make sure that all of our subprojects have their own web page on
>       our site (not all do yet).


also the subproject documentation that is there is (imho) not visible enough
( have to click Documentation->...um...->Subproject Documentation->aha... )

perhaps we could add a direct link to the subprojects page from the main
page?

   2. Create some sort of simple template for each one to indicate on
>       which frameworks it should work on and which it has been tested
>       on. This could include mention of execution environment and/or JDK.


yes - a matrix of bundles against frameworks/EE would be really cool and we
could perhaps find a way to display it on the main page (in reduced form, so
it doesn't takeover the whole page, but shows our bundles can be used with
many other frameworks)

each sub-project page could have a banner at the top with specific results

Perhaps we could create some pithy table showing the different
> concerns...even use some nice icons. :-) Then it would be clear to
> anyone going to any subproject whether it might be useful to them or not.
>
> Anyone interested in proposing a design for such a table? Or have better
> ideas altogether?


+1 for something like a matrix, but I'm no good at web-design ;)

-> richard
>
> Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> > On Jan 15, 2008 8:32 PM, Richard S. Hall <heavy@ungoverned.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Further, I am not really certain about what is being said here. This
> >> thread seems to imply that if we did "rm -rf framework" in our trunk
> >> directory, then it would be possible for our bundles to be seen as
> >> framework independent and good OSGi citizens. However, since one of our
> >> subprojects happens to be a framework implementation, then all of our
> >> subprojects are tainted and seen as "Felix-only"? Is that right?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > I think the situation is a bit more complicated.  We have the same
> problems
> > in ServiceMix where we have both a JBI container and JBI components.
> > I think users are tempted to assume that there is an implicit tie
> between
> > the runtime and the services provided.  OPS4j does not provide any OSGi
> > runtime, thus, it easier to look at it as independent of the runtime.
> >
> >
>



-- 
Cheers, Stuart

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message