Hi all, Thanks for the replies. I'll try to summarize what has been posted by now:
- Thales is going to use Celix in a research project and is actively developing Celix and with Celix. Part of their development is an implementation of the Device Access Specification, which will be donated to Celix. I think this is great news! Pepijn: Are you willing to maintain the Device Access implementation if it is donated to Celix? - Use Celix as an alternative for JNI, which provides a more robust solution. The processes are separated, and one side crashing won't take down the other. Does anyone have a specific use case or interest in this that can be used as a showcase? - During many discussions C++ is mentioned, also seing the replies now again there seems to be quite a lot of interest in an OSGi implementation in C++. - There are several C++ OSGi like implementations, collaboration with these projects could benefit both. Seeing this interest in C++, I think it would be a good starting point to try and reach a broader community. The following C++ frameworks are mentioned: - nOSGi: http://www-vs.informatik.uni-ulm.de/proj/nosgi/ - SOF: http://sof.tiddlyspot.com/ - CommonTK Plugin Framework: http://www.commontk.org/index.php/Documentation/Plugin_Framework Areas where I think collaboration might be interesting are: * Bundling * Metadata * API (how to map the OSGi specification to C/C++) Does anyone have any ideas/suggestions regarding this? What would be a good starting point? Also I think it is interesting how the current Celix framework can be extended so that it can support C++. If possible I would like to keep a C only framework, with specific extensions if used with C++. Again, any ideas are welcome! My knowledge about C++ isn't that great, so any help would be appreciated. If I misunderstood or forgot something, feel free to correct me. 2012/1/11 Sascha Zelzer <[email protected]> > There is another project which I forgot to mention: nOSGi ( > http://www-vs.informatik.uni-**ulm.de/proj/nosgi/<http://www-vs.informatik.uni-ulm.de/proj/nosgi/>) > > It also has a very nice paper explaining their approach. Maybe we can get > the devopers of all these frameworks together to share their requirements, > ideas, visions, etc. > > Just my two cents. > > Thanks, > > Sascha > > > > On 01/11/2012 01:41 PM, Sascha Zelzer wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I am following the Celix efforts with interest, but I am also more >> interested in C++. >> >> In my opinion, Celix could try to reach out to other projects and their >> (probably small) community implementing a OSGi - like environment. If >> efforts could be concentrate, or some kind of interoperability be >> achieved, this would be awesome. Projects in my mind are Poco >> (commercial), SOF, and CTK. >> >> I tried to start some discussions about that a while ago, but >> unfortunately did not get any replies: >> >> http://incubator.markmail.org/**search/+list:org.apache.** >> incubator.celix-dev#query:**list%3Aorg.apache.incubator.** >> celix-dev%20from%3A%22Sascha%**20Zelzer%22+page:1+mid:** >> yrsceyy3ovisbhkh+state:results<http://incubator.markmail.org/search/+list:org.apache.incubator.celix-dev#query:list%3Aorg.apache.incubator.celix-dev%20from%3A%22Sascha%20Zelzer%22+page:1+mid:yrsceyy3ovisbhkh+state:results> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Sascha >> >> On 01/11/2012 01:32 PM, Martim wrote: >> >>> I think that the c++ point is a good one. Given celix as a universal >>> osgi, how language bindings enter in scene? >>> Other languages communities could benefit by having a osgi >>> implementation. Object oriented languages tend to have a community more >>> open to this kind of development (service oriented) than c community. As >>> a c++ developer I would love if I could use a good osgi implementation >>> with a good community support and Apache as the infrastructure provider >>> in my daily work (currently we are using SOF >>> (http://sof.tiddlyspot.com/), which is good but with almost zero >>> support). Python, Ruby, .net world, all that could benefit too. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Martim >>> >>> Em 11/01/2012 06:04, Pepijn Noltes escreveu: >>> >>>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Marcel Offermans >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Jan 11, 2012, at 7:30 AM, Alexander Broekhuis wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On the incubator list a discussion is going on about slow/small >>>>>> poddlings >>>>>> and how to handle these. Celix is one of these poddlings. >>>>>> >>>>>> For Celix I see the following problems (at least): >>>>>> - No community growth (or not visible..) >>>>>> - No new committers >>>>>> - No releases made >>>>>> >>>>>> I think a plan is needed to see how we can move Celix towards >>>>>> graduation, >>>>>> how we can get a community, more committers etc. >>>>>> >>>>> Agreed. The Incubator PMC in particular is interested in learning how >>>>> the community intends to address the issues that prevent a podling from >>>>> graduating. They feel that, especially after being in the incubator for >>>>> over a year, a graduation plan should be drafted. >>>>> >>>> Concerning the Celix community growth, at Thales Netherlands we are >>>> currently working on a research project in which Celix plays a big >>>> part. We are exploring the opportunity to use Celix as a middleware >>>> solution - replacing our propertairy solution - in our Radar >>>> development. We strongly feel this is going to be a succes and are the >>>> moment busy developing the OSGi Device Access Specification in Celix. >>>> We are planning to send a patch in the coming weeks. Hopefully this >>>> helps in supporting Celix :) >>>> >>>> Looking at the three items, the first two will be the most difficult, >>>>>> and >>>>>> require the most attention. We have been working on visibility, going >>>>>> to >>>>>> the EclipseCon, ApacheCon and several other smaller local community >>>>>> events. >>>>>> >>>>> Again, I agree. While it is time to make a release as well, and this >>>>> might actually help people who want to take a look at Celix, the main >>>>> issue >>>>> that needs to be addressed is the size and diversity of the community. >>>>> >>>>> At these events you mention, no doubt you have talked directly to a >>>>> bunch of people. Could you somehow summarize their feedback? >>>>> >>>>> What other communities can we possibly reach out to, and how? >>>>> >>>>> I'd like to hear what people following this list think of these >>>>>> problems, >>>>>> and how we can move towards a healthy community. What is holding you >>>>>> back? >>>>>> What is needed to be able to adopt Celix? Feel free to express any >>>>>> concern >>>>>> or opinion you have. Either technical, documentation etc. >>>>>> >>>>> One question I've been getting occasionally is: "does Celix also work >>>>> with C++?". >>>>> >>>>> From a use case point of view, I think we could explore the scenario >>>>> where you have Java application that uses native code. Mostly, this is now >>>>> done using JNI which has the downside that it can take the whole JVM down >>>>> if something goes wrong in the native code. From a robustness point of >>>>> view, this is unacceptable, and I think Celix can be used to provide a >>>>> better implementation. With this use case, we can target any Java project >>>>> that uses native libraries, which in turn might help growing our >>>>> community. >>>>> Such use cases are probably interesting enough to write about on all kinds >>>>> of Java sites. >>>>> >>>> Good idea. I also think a working scenario with Celix instead of JNI >>>> is worth presenting to different Java user groups. >>>> >>>> Greetings, Marcel >>>>> >>>>> Greetings, >>>> Pepijn >>>> >>> > -- Met vriendelijke groet, Alexander Broekhuis
