incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Richard S. Hall" <he...@ungoverned.org>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache Aries incubator for Enterprise OSGi
Date Sun, 06 Sep 2009 04:39:57 GMT
On 9/5/09 13:36, Niall Pemberton wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Richard S. Hall<heavy@ungoverned.org>  wrote:
>    
>> I will try to keep this short.
>>
>> The OSGi Service Platform is composed of the core and compendium specs. The
>> EEG specs are not in any way special and will ultimately end up as part of
>> the compendium spec. Apache Felix was incubated to build a community at
>> Apache around implementing the OSGi specs.
>>
>> Now we are being told that this mission is too tainted because we implement
>> the framework spec, which is part of the core spec. I find this unfathomable
>> given the nature of OSGi and the efforts to which the Felix community goes
>> to be good OSGi citizens...we even allow for competing implementations
>> within our community.
>>
>> It is also particularly odd, since the Equinox and Knopflerfish communities
>> are in the same situation, implementing both core and compendium specs with
>> their frameworks largely synonymous with their project name.
>>
>> I am not naive enough to expect this discussion to change much, since I
>> imagine there has already been a fair amount of political calculation around
>> this proposal, otherwise the Felix community in general would have been
>> engaged earlier.
>>
>> So, here's my vote:
>>
>>    * -1 for the portion of the proposal creating yet another community
>>      for implementing OSGi specs at Apache since the Felix community
>>      would happily welcome more contribution (just like recently
>>      occurred with ServiceMix members being accepted as Felix
>>      committers and PMC members for the Karaf subproject)
>>      
> Voting against a bunch of people forming a new community here at the
> ASF is v.disappointing and goes against what IMO the ASF is all about.
>    

It is also very disappointing to have my position mischaracterized, 
since I have been pretty consistent:

    I support the creation of a new community around an EE component
    model for OSGi and OSGi specs dependent upon this technology;
    however, I believe the Felix project is the best choice to work on
    independent OSGi specs since we have been doing it for years and it
    would guarantee cross-project collaboration.

If you find this position disappointing, then I am not sure what to say. 
On the other hand, if you just disagree with it, that's fine, since I 
disagree too. And it is my understanding that this is the forum to 
discuss disagreements about project proposals.

One thing we can all agree on, is this thread is rather tiresome, so 
let's move on.

-> richard


> If the Felix community wants to get involved with their efforts then
> great, if not then don't try to block what they want to do. As others
> have said there are various options for graduation, but I think you've
> made Felix less rather than more likely by your antagonism to this
> proposal.
>
> I'm +1 to this proposal and hoping Felix members with shared interests
> get involved.
>
> Niall
>
>    
>>    * +1 for the rest of the proposal to explore how to build an
>>      enterprise component model on OSGi and the other non-spec related
>>      topics.
>>
>> ->  richard
>>
>>
>> On 9/1/09 22:53, Kevan Miller wrote:
>>      
>>> On Sep 1, 2009, at 2:08 PM, Richard S. Hall wrote:
>>>
>>>        
>>>> On 9/1/09 13:59, Martin Cooper wrote:
>>>>          
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Richard S. Hall<heavy@ungoverned.org>
>>>>>   wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure I understand the issue here. Whether Aries becomes its
>>>>> own TLP, or a sub-project of Felix or some other TLP, isn't relevant
>>>>> until the project is ready to exit incubation. Why does it warrant
>>>>> such apparently intense discussion before the project is even accepted
>>>>>
>>>>>            
>>>> We are actually discussing something else. We are discussing the scope of
>>>> the proposal, which includes hosting OSGi standard service implementations,
>>>> which is part of Felix' scope.
>>>>
>>>> If we are developing standard OSGi services within Apache, then Felix
>>>> provides an enthusiastic community to do this and there is no need to start
>>>> another incubator project for such a purpose. On the other hand, stuff like
>>>> "a set of pluggable Java components enabling an enterprise OSGi application
>>>> programming model" makes perfect sense to be incubated.
>>>>          
>>> Thanks for the clarification... So, your issue is mainly with "It is a
>>> goal of the Aries project to provide a natural home for open source
>>> implementations of current and future OSGi EEG specifications..."?
>>> Personally, I tend to think of Felix in terms of OSGi Core Platform. I
>>> certainly hadn't expected it to be the source for all OSGi standard
>>> implementations from Apache -- not for implementations of Enterprise Expert
>>> Group specs, anyway. I'm sure there are flaws with my perceptions...
>>>
>>> So, we have a group that is interested in working on an enterprise OSGi
>>> application programming model at Apache (including implementations of at
>>> least some EEG specifications). An incubator project would seem to be an
>>> excellent place for this work to start. Interested Felix community members
>>> would certainly be able to join this effort.
>>>
>>> It then becomes a question of, assuming successful incubation, where does
>>> the community graduate to? TLP, Felix subproject(s), or elsewhere. All
>>> successful outcomes, IMO.
>>>
>>> --kevan
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>        
>>      
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>    

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