incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Strachan <james.strac...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache Aries incubator for Enterprise OSGi
Date Tue, 01 Sep 2009 15:54:45 GMT
2009/9/1 Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@gmail.com>:
> Not sure how to articulate my thoughts here.
>
> First, it's not about competing against Felix, though you'll find in the ASF
> multiple competing products (Axis vs CXF to mention only this one) and the
> ASF has never stated as a goal that it would provide a coherent offer or
> anything like this.
>
> The problem I have with Felix is really a branding problem.  While *we* (as
> developers) very well know that all the subprojects of Felix are not tied to
> the Felix Framework itself, it's really difficult to spread this word around
> to non techies.  The name Felix is often associated to the OSGi framework
> implementation itself, and it's kinda hard to remove this tie unless either
> the project or the framework change its name to something else.  For
> example, the framework could be referred to as Apache Foo and other
> subprojects as Apache iPojo or Apache Karaf.  I think it would help removing
> this tie.   The other way around is possible too, rename the project to
> something else, and keep Apache Felix as referring to the framework itself
> (which might be even better, but slightly more difficult to actually
> achieve).  I'm not sure there is a very easy way, but dev@felix.a.o would a
> better place to discuss that.
>
> Another thought that comes to my mind is that over the past years, the ASF
> has tried to dismantle umbrella projects when it makes sense: i.e. when one
> of the subproject has sufficient momentum to create a community on its own.
> ACE is another podling related to OSGi and AFAIK it implements the
> DeploymentAdmin OSGi spec.   I also see Karaf as a possible TLP at some
> point.   That would become a problem with Felix, as the communities are
> rather disjoint between the subprojects (not all, I do agree).  Not sure
> what the good size for a TLP is and other members can join the discussion
> and provide feedback.   I don't think felix is oversized right now, but it
> might become a problem if it goes too far.    Given this proposal includes
> more than 20 committers and most of them are not felix committers, we'd need
> the incubator for building up this community anyway.   And btw, as any other
> incubator proposal, everyone interested is free to join the proposal and we
> would particularly welcome any felix committer here.
>
> That said, Aries wants to focus on application focused enterprise OSGi
> specs, which I do agree, could fit in the Felix scope, as could Ace do
> too.   I guess in all cases, things can be discussed at the time the podling
> will graduate out of the incubator.  The current goal is to aim to TLP as we
> think the size of the project can back that, but this is not written in
> stone.

FWIW I agree too. I think the name "Felix" is now synonymous with the
Felix OSGi framework implementation in most peoples eyes.

-- 
James
-------
http://macstrac.blogspot.com/

Open Source Integration
http://fusesource.com/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message