This sounds like a great proposal if the licensing issues can be ironed out. 
Certainly SpringSource/VMware have been exploring ways to transition the 
SpringSource Enterprise Bundle Repository (EBR, [i]) to a community model for 
some time, but discussions with other vendors are taking a while, mainly due to 
licensing issues as you might expect.

Please note that the build and manifest template files from the EBR are 
available on github ([ii]) should the community want to populate Tipi with 
equivalents of the bundleised 3rd party JARs in the EBR so they can reasonably 
claim Tipi has superseded the EBR.

Regards,
Glyn
[i] http://ebr.springsource.com/repository/app/
[ii] https://github.com/glyn/bundlerepo

On 26 Jan 2012, at 19:34, Harald Wellmann wrote:

> In an ideal world, there would be no need for this...
> 
> Every open source Java project would build OSGi bundles instead of plain old 
> JARs and push them to The Central Repository (aka Maven Central).
> 
> But the harsh reality is, Maven-based OSGi projects often require third-party 
> libs that are not mavenized or osgified, or neither.
> 
> Some notorious examples that affect Pax Exam:
> - JUnit 4.10 is in Maven Central, but not osgified
> - Equinox 3.7.1 is OSGi (obviously...) but not in Maven Central.
> 
> Of course, the preferred approach is submitting enhancement or pull requests 
> to the original developers and hoping they'll do their homework within 
> reasonable time.
> 
> Sometimes this works (example: TestNG [1]), sometimes it doesn't (examples: 
> JUnit [2][3], Equinox [4]).
> 
> So what I'm proposing is similar to Apache Servicemix Bundles or SpringSource 
> Enterprise Bundle Repository, but with a big difference - the OPS4J low-to-no 
> barrier philosophy: if you want to get a job done, just do it and share it.
> 
> In essence, Pax Tipi should contain nothing but POMs or other build scripts, 
> it's only about repackaging existing libraries and pushing them to Central 
> using the existing OPS4J infrastructure.
> 
> We'd have to set up some naming and versioning standards, but that's about it.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> [1] https://github.com/cbeust/testng/pull/86
> [2] https://issuetracker.springsource.com/browse/EBR-803
> [3] https://github.com/KentBeck/junit/pull/368
> [4] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=365798
> 
> Cheers,
> Harald
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> general mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general


_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general

Reply via email to