Re: Contributing parts of the ServiceRegistry Hooks (RFC 126) implementation into Felix
I will try to take a look at it soon. -> richard David Bosschaert wrote: Hi all, 2008/11/7 David Bosschaert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: 2008/11/4 Richard S. Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: I think it sounds reasonable. I am all for creating a JIRA issue with appropriate patch. Great. I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-804 where the patch will ultimately be attached. I've attached the patch containing the ListenerHook implementation to this bug. I also put some notes regarding the patch in the comment of the bug. It would be great if someone could review and apply it. Many thanks, David
Re: Contributing parts of the ServiceRegistry Hooks (RFC 126) implementation into Felix
Hi all, 2008/11/7 David Bosschaert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > 2008/11/4 Richard S. Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> I think it sounds reasonable. I am all for creating a JIRA issue with >> appropriate patch. > > Great. I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-804 > where the patch will ultimately be attached. I've attached the patch containing the ListenerHook implementation to this bug. I also put some notes regarding the patch in the comment of the bug. It would be great if someone could review and apply it. Many thanks, David
Re: Contributing parts of the ServiceRegistry Hooks (RFC 126) implementation into Felix
2008/11/4 Richard S. Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I think it sounds reasonable. I am all for creating a JIRA issue with > appropriate patch. Great. I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-804 where the patch will ultimately be attached. > I assume that since this is already in CXF svn repo, that IP clearance is > already taken care of, so we should just be able to move forward with the > proposed patch. Is that correct? Yes. All the code in the CXF sandbox has been contributed to the ASF through the appropriate processes. Cheers, David
Re: Contributing parts of the ServiceRegistry Hooks (RFC 126) implementation into Felix
Hello David, On Nov 4, 2008, at 17:33 , David Bosschaert wrote: In the context of the Apache CXF project a number of people have been involved in implementing the Distribution Software part of Distributed OSGi (RFC 119 [1]). [...] If Felix is interested in taking this implementation, it might make sense to create a bug in Felix JIRA so that this stuff can be attached as a patch to that once its ready to move into Felix. +1 That's great news! After discussing this with you in Berlin, I've become very enthousiastic about this. Greetings, Marcel
Re: Contributing parts of the ServiceRegistry Hooks (RFC 126) implementation into Felix
2008/11/5 David Bosschaert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Hi all, > > In the context of the Apache CXF project a number of people have been > involved in implementing the Distribution Software part of Distributed > OSGi (RFC 119 [1]). > > For its functioning on the client side, Distributed OSGi depends on > the OSGi Service Registry Hooks (RFC 126, also available in [1]). To > keep us going we implemented certain bits of RFC 126 in a private copy > of Felix in the CXF DOSGi buildsystem. However, we would like to use > the real Felix, so we are interested in contributing our RFC 126 bits > into Felix so we can use it straight from there. This is referenced in > CXF bug https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-1897 > > The CXF codebase doesnt contain all of RFC 126 - it only contains the > ListenerHook, which is about a third of RFC 126, but it would provide > a start... > > If Felix is interested in taking this implementation, it might make > sense to create a bug in Felix JIRA so that this stuff can be attached > as a patch to that once its ready to move into Felix. > > Thoughts anyone? > +1 sounds good to me > Best regards, > > David > > [1] http://www.osgi.org/download/osgi-4.2-early-draft.pdf > -- Cheers, Stuart
Re: Contributing parts of the ServiceRegistry Hooks (RFC 126) implementation into Felix
I think it sounds reasonable. I am all for creating a JIRA issue with appropriate patch. I assume that since this is already in CXF svn repo, that IP clearance is already taken care of, so we should just be able to move forward with the proposed patch. Is that correct? -> richard David Bosschaert wrote: Hi all, In the context of the Apache CXF project a number of people have been involved in implementing the Distribution Software part of Distributed OSGi (RFC 119 [1]). For its functioning on the client side, Distributed OSGi depends on the OSGi Service Registry Hooks (RFC 126, also available in [1]). To keep us going we implemented certain bits of RFC 126 in a private copy of Felix in the CXF DOSGi buildsystem. However, we would like to use the real Felix, so we are interested in contributing our RFC 126 bits into Felix so we can use it straight from there. This is referenced in CXF bug https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-1897 The CXF codebase doesnt contain all of RFC 126 - it only contains the ListenerHook, which is about a third of RFC 126, but it would provide a start... If Felix is interested in taking this implementation, it might make sense to create a bug in Felix JIRA so that this stuff can be attached as a patch to that once its ready to move into Felix. Thoughts anyone? Best regards, David [1] http://www.osgi.org/download/osgi-4.2-early-draft.pdf
Contributing parts of the ServiceRegistry Hooks (RFC 126) implementation into Felix
Hi all, In the context of the Apache CXF project a number of people have been involved in implementing the Distribution Software part of Distributed OSGi (RFC 119 [1]). For its functioning on the client side, Distributed OSGi depends on the OSGi Service Registry Hooks (RFC 126, also available in [1]). To keep us going we implemented certain bits of RFC 126 in a private copy of Felix in the CXF DOSGi buildsystem. However, we would like to use the real Felix, so we are interested in contributing our RFC 126 bits into Felix so we can use it straight from there. This is referenced in CXF bug https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-1897 The CXF codebase doesnt contain all of RFC 126 - it only contains the ListenerHook, which is about a third of RFC 126, but it would provide a start... If Felix is interested in taking this implementation, it might make sense to create a bug in Felix JIRA so that this stuff can be attached as a patch to that once its ready to move into Felix. Thoughts anyone? Best regards, David [1] http://www.osgi.org/download/osgi-4.2-early-draft.pdf