www-jcp-open mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Niclas Hedhman" <nic...@hedhman.org>
Subject Re: JSR 291 - public review
Date Mon, 22 Jan 2007 17:23:52 GMT
On 1/22/07, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> On Jan 21, 2007, at 9:57 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
>
> > On 1/22/07, Bruce Snyder <bruce.snyder@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I'm not sure I'm in favor of it either, even though I'm on the EG. My
> >> intention was never to just rubber stamp the OSGi spec,
> >
> > Then your job is to speak up... ;o)
> >
> >> as I think
> >> that the OSGi has no place in the JSE.
> >
> > What? I can only interpret this mean 2 things. Either;
> >
> > 1. You think OSGi should not be deployed on Java SE.
> >
> > 2. You think OSGi should not be shipped with the JDK.
> >
> > I assume you mean the second one, as the first one is hilariously
> > silly...
> >
> > Well, IMHO, the JDK is over bloated since long, and the main focus
> > around release 1,2/1.3 should have been something like what we now see
> > in the JSR-277, allowing for simple extensions of the runtime
> > platform.
> >
> > Now, that said; Please take a look at the 300 or so JSRs so far, and
> > see how many is or will be shipping in either the JDK or is part of
> > the non-optional Java EE specification set.
> >
>
> This is off topic.  Not necessarily wrong, but off topic.
>
> can you give us your opinion on how the ASF should vote on this?

If that question is directed to me, let me remind you that I am not an
ASF member, and Alex is the ASF rep in this. I hope the question was
more directed to jcp-open@ in general... ;o)

Personally, I would be very delighted if ASF is supporting this JSR,
which seems more controversial at the political arena than the
technical one (which few disputes). After some brushes with politics
in OSS, I have decided to stay away if possible. I trust you guys to
make a balanced decision.


Cheers
Niclas

Mime
View raw message