The Avalon framework seems to address the same area that the Open Services Gateway Initiative (OSGi, www.osgi.org) addresses. This work, which started as one of the first JSRs in 1998, has resulted in a comprehensive specification for a services framework initially targeting the home network/automation but became much more horizontal in the past 2 years.
The Release 2 spec can be downloaded from the web site http://www.osgi.org/resources/docs/spr2book.pdf (There is no licensing involved). The next release, that is focused on the car industry but contains many more horizontal (optional) services (twice as much text), is due Q1 2003. It will likely add a component wiring model, start levels (similar to run levels), communication service, Jini, UPnP, architectures, positioning, measurements, xml parsers, namespace, and much more. A technical introduction can be found in http://www.osgi.org/news/osgi_news/marples_layout.pdf. There was also an article in Java Developers Journal this year called "The last mile of software deployment". (If you are interested, I can send you the PDF). There are already several open source versions in the making, search on www.sourceforge.org for OSGi. OpenSugar (a member) promised last week on the OSGi world congress to submit their framework for compliance after which they will make it OSS as well (www.objectweb.org). The result is component framework that is applicable in many different areas. Some of these areas can be found in http://www.osgi.org/about/OSGi_Fact_Sheet_SeptFINAL.pdf So far, 11 companies, among which the big guns like IBM and SUN, have a compliant framework including the optional services. The spec has been serious work by very experienced people over a significant amount of time. with many f2f meetings The feedback that technical people give about this spec is almost without exception very positive. Why am I telling this? I would like to ask the Avalon group to take a look at the OSGi specification and see if some form of compatibility is feasible. I had a prior discussion with Leo Simons before this mail and I understand that are many legal concerns. Strangely enough, all his non-technical arguments were exactly the arguments that caused the OSGi specification to leave JCP and become an independent consortium. The OSGi members are very concerned for specifications that will contain licensed IPR and the whole structure of the OSGi is based on equal membership, statements of work, and a requirement to claim IPR to a specification before it is published. However, I am not a lawyer and the legal issue would require some of those. But maybe we can first have a technical discussion before we dive into the politics and legalities? About me. I have been heavily involved in the technical work of these specifications since 1998. However, I sent this mail personally, not as an OSGi representative. I am very interested in getting the specs implemented in Apache code. Obvioulsy because I have a stake in the success of these specifications, but even more because I think they are good enough to be used much wider. So I am willing to devote time to the development of Avalon if it is willing to consider implementing the OSGi specs. I know this is asking a lot, but I think it may create a very good synergy that helps the OSGi with more visibility and Avalon with a large chunk of ready made specifications and adopters. Better, we would not splinter the Java world with multiple service delivery frameworks, though there exists at least 1 company that would not mind :-) So, could we have a -technical- discussion about having Avalon implement the OSGi specifications? If we see possibilities, we can get the (professional) lawyers involved later :-) Kind regards, Peter Kriens -- Peter Kriens Tel. +46 30039800 Finnasandsv�gen 22 Fax. +46 30039805 SE-43933 Onsala Mob. +46705950899 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
