river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sam Chance <sgcha...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: OSGi and Jini
Date Tue, 14 Jul 2009 23:04:14 GMT
All,

This article at the link below represents a "typical" example of how/why a
given capability is designed and developed using OSGi technology.

http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-world/wso2-looks-make-soa-easier-241

Here is another one that might surprise you. Look in the "What's New in
Protege 4.0?" section.  There is a bulleted list of new features.

http://www.cmswire.com/cms/web-content/edit-owl-20-ontologies-with-new-protege-40-005009.php

Sam

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Sam Chance <sgchance@gmail.com> wrote:

> Jools,
>
> That's great to hear!  Please let me know when you set up org.indjinn.  I'd
> love to see it.
>
> Also, I suspect you will see some of the Paremus guys at the London event.
>
> Thank you!
> Sam
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Jools <joolski@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > Dennis Reedy wrote:
>> >
>> > "Forget about OSGi for now, its a red herring for River moving out of
>> > incubation, and frankly a bit of noise that produces the same reaction
>> > every
>> > time it is posted. This is not to say the each technology (combined or
>> > separate) does not have its merits/issues, its just time to move on.
>> ..."
>> >
>>
>> Let me paraphrase what Dennis means;
>>
>> Every time the discussion of how we move jini/river forward, we get the
>> same
>> bunch of nay-sayers spewing onto the list.
>> Let's just try and get a release out with what have now so we can see how
>> to
>> get the next release built.
>>
>> <snip/>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > I agree with the last phrase of the last sentence. But it's remarkable
>> how
>> > differently we collectively disagree with what "...moving on..." means!
>> To
>> > some, "moving on" means embracing OSGi, particularly distributed OSGi
>> > (D-OSGi). To others, it means treating OSGi as orthogonal to Jini/River.
>> >
>>
>> > I know you guys are very busy, but it would be nice if the most
>> experienced
>> > Jini/River software engineers were able to dissect the [OSGi] RFC 119
>> and
>> > provide an assessment as to how or if it is "suited" for Jini/River.  I
>> > know
>> > it's tough to allocate time to do that though.
>> >
>>
>> I went to the OSGI conference in Zurich, and will be attending the UK OSGI
>> conference in London on July 14th to try and get a handle on where D-OSGI
>> is
>> going.
>> Or rather "Remoteness in OSGI" as it seems to be called these days.
>>
>> I've been working on a few possible uses for OSGI, as it relates to Jini
>> and
>> in certain situations it's a very good mix.
>> Using Rio and Felix I've taken an existing application (which is currently
>> live and working very nicely) and tried to wire up the application using
>> Bundles, by embdeding an instance of Apache Felix inside my ServiceBean
>> (Rio
>> speak for Jini service).
>>
>> And shock horror..... it worked.
>>
>> I've also been playing around with turning functional parts of the Jini
>> codebase into bundles, exporters, service discovery etc and I've had some
>> success and failure.
>>
>>
>> Hopefully I'll see some Jini guys at the conference, but if not I'll post
>> up
>> my findings on org.indjinn (when I've set it up!)
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> --Jools
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Sam Chance
> 443-694-5293 (m)
> 410-694-0240 x108 (o)
>



-- 
Sam Chance
443-694-5293 (m)
410-694-0240 x108 (o)

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