Well, OSGi is a component model so it would be surprising if we all thought the same, especially in open source. At least OSGi allows full co-operation between these ‘camps’.
That said, I think is quickly getting closer to the DS ‘camp’, Christian seems
to spend a lot of effort.
Kind regards,
Peter Kriens
> On 9 jun. 2016, at 12:48, Milen Dyankov <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I "like" how someone described OSGi community divided into camps! From one
> side, it kind of makes me fell better to know I'm not the only one having
> this strange feeling! From the other side, it makes me sad that more people
> are feeling this way.
>
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Daniel McGreal <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> That was me, and yes, that’s the correct interpretation - the feedback as
> several other contributors*.
>
> We don’t like to take the implied responsibility for maintaining jars we
> repackage ourselves with OSGi MANIFEST.MF headers for a variety of reasons.
> Luckily the situation is getting better, based on my experience.
> Generation tools are better, more convenient and therefore more prevalent
> (thanks bnd-maven-plugin).
> OSGi headers are cropping up from source more and more regularly (I’d love to
> see another scan of central to see how many jars supply them, broken down by
> popularity).
> ServiceMix provides distributions, though they sometimes seemingly haven’t
> been tested.
> Karaf wrap means things frequently just work at deployment time
>
> Best, Dan.
>
> * Balazs, I’d meekly suggest grouping the ‘other’ responses and including
> into the graphs where significant. For example, Karaf shell clearly deserves
> a place if the extra responses were grouped, as does Vaadin for UIs, etc.
>
>> On 8 Jun 2016, at 20:53, Balázs Zsoldos <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>> My guess is that OSGi metadata here mean the OSGi MANIFEST headers and the
>> sentence mean something like the following: Lot's of technologies do not
>> have the OSGi MANIFEST headers in their jars, but thanks to ServiceMix the
>> situation is getting better (as ServiceMix re-packages many popular jars)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OSGi Developer Mail List
> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
> <https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev>
>
>
>
> --
> http://about.me/milen
> <http://about.me/milen>_______________________________________________
> OSGi Developer Mail List
> [email protected]
> https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List [email protected] https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
