felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benedikt Ritter <b...@systemoutprintln.de>
Subject Re: Improving documentation and SimpleShape examples
Date Mon, 05 Mar 2012 17:24:04 GMT
Am 05.03.2012 18:12, schrieb Richard S. Hall:
> On 3/5/12 11:47 , Benedikt Ritter wrote:
>> I've just looked through the documentation on http://felix.apache.org
>> and I would like to help improving it. In particular I'm talking about
>> http://felix.apache.org/site/apache-felix-application-demonstration.html.
>> The header of the page says, that "this document is work in progress"
>> but judging from the fooder, there hasn't been an update for more than
>> 4 years now.
> Slow progress. ;-)
>> What I have in mind is to include a Prerequisites section, that gives
>> some background to svn and maven (what is it, where can I get it), as
>> well as references to the more basic examples
>> (http://felix.apache.org/site/apache-felix-framework-usage-documentation.html).
>> Beside that I would like to give some more explanation on what the
>> code is actually doing (right now it just says "Examine the source
>> code to understand the details of the approach. In the future this
>> documentation will hopefully be expanded to described more details." ;)
> Sounds reasonable.
>> Also, I'd like to improve the source code of the example itself. From
>> what I've seen, I assume, that the example is not using Java 5
>> features ATM. The target value for the maven compiler plugin in the
>> parent POM is 1.3. Is it true, that the complete felix distribution is
>> targeted at Java 1.3?!
> The framework certainly does and most other subprojects do too, but it
> is a case-by-case basis. For example, Gogo does not.
>> One of first things I came across are the int constants in
>> org.apache.felix.example.servicebased.host.ShapeTracker. If Java 5
>> features are allowed, I would replace that by an enum.
>> What do you think?
> Technically, I'm not against it, but this is one of the tradeoffs, since
> OSGi was designed to work for embedded devices, it meant being stuck on
> the older/smaller JVMs. So, using these features immediately limits the
> applicability of examples for people in this area. However, at this
> point, I'm not sure how many people are really using it in this area
> anymore, so it may or may not matter.

Okay, I understand that. I have no experience with embedded device 
development, but I would argue, that a drawing tool for graphical shapes 
is not the regular use case for that domain :)
So maybe it would be better to create a real world example for embedded 
devices. But as I said, thats beyond my skills.

> Regardless, documentation improvement is probably better than
> stagnation. So, I'd probably be fine with it.
> Have you submitted an ICLA to Apache previously for any previous
> contributions? If not, it would probably be a good idea. Then you just
> need to create an account in Confluence (although we have to move to a
> new CMS soon, btu hopefully that will be somewhat painless) so we can
> give you karma.

I've been contributing some patches for commons, but there was no need 
for an ICLA (at least nobody asked for it ;). Can you give me some more 
information about that?

> -> richard
>> Regards,
>> Benedikt

View raw message