On May 22, 2007, at 18:07 , Richard S. Hall wrote:
Since the overall response has been positive (even though I am mostly in the "excess cruft" camp with Eric), I have gone ahead and added it.
I'm also in that camp, but I was at a conference (without internet) today, so I missed out on the initial discussion.
I'm wondering, if ServiceTracker was supposed to be part of the framework, why didn't OSGi define it as such. Since it's not part of the framework, I don't like including it in Felix by default. It just increases the size of the core.
So in my opinion we should not include it by default.
Of course, BND could solve this by having people just pull ST into their bundle. But if everyone were to do this, then the savings we see by not having ST in the framework JAR would be quickly outweighed by the multiple copies of ST embedded into all of the bundles that use it.
If people don't need the whole compendium, they are free to create a meaningful subset of it and use that. That's the other option they have.
If people are using another dependency manager (such as iPOJO) then they don't need to use ST and you might actually want to discourage people from using it at all by not providing it.
