2009/9/1 Guillaume Nodet <gno...@gmail.com>: > Not sure how to articulate my thoughts here. > > First, it's not about competing against Felix, though you'll find in the ASF > multiple competing products (Axis vs CXF to mention only this one) and the > ASF has never stated as a goal that it would provide a coherent offer or > anything like this. > > The problem I have with Felix is really a branding problem. While *we* (as > developers) very well know that all the subprojects of Felix are not tied to > the Felix Framework itself, it's really difficult to spread this word around > to non techies. The name Felix is often associated to the OSGi framework > implementation itself, and it's kinda hard to remove this tie unless either > the project or the framework change its name to something else. For > example, the framework could be referred to as Apache Foo and other > subprojects as Apache iPojo or Apache Karaf. I think it would help removing > this tie. The other way around is possible too, rename the project to > something else, and keep Apache Felix as referring to the framework itself > (which might be even better, but slightly more difficult to actually > achieve). I'm not sure there is a very easy way, but d...@felix.a.o would a > better place to discuss that. > > Another thought that comes to my mind is that over the past years, the ASF > has tried to dismantle umbrella projects when it makes sense: i.e. when one > of the subproject has sufficient momentum to create a community on its own. > ACE is another podling related to OSGi and AFAIK it implements the > DeploymentAdmin OSGi spec. I also see Karaf as a possible TLP at some > point. That would become a problem with Felix, as the communities are > rather disjoint between the subprojects (not all, I do agree). Not sure > what the good size for a TLP is and other members can join the discussion > and provide feedback. I don't think felix is oversized right now, but it > might become a problem if it goes too far. Given this proposal includes > more than 20 committers and most of them are not felix committers, we'd need > the incubator for building up this community anyway. And btw, as any other > incubator proposal, everyone interested is free to join the proposal and we > would particularly welcome any felix committer here. > > That said, Aries wants to focus on application focused enterprise OSGi > specs, which I do agree, could fit in the Felix scope, as could Ace do > too. I guess in all cases, things can be discussed at the time the podling > will graduate out of the incubator. The current goal is to aim to TLP as we > think the size of the project can back that, but this is not written in > stone.
FWIW I agree too. I think the name "Felix" is now synonymous with the Felix OSGi framework implementation in most peoples eyes. -- James ------- http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ Open Source Integration http://fusesource.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
