Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

On 1/18/17 18:03 , Guillaume Nodet wrote: The problem is when the "what" is being prototyped in an Apache project, not the "how". The "how" can be done by any committer, but if the "what" is still being discussed, you really have no saying over the "how" yet. Basically, no one will ever question

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

The problem is when the "what" is being prototyped in an Apache project, not the "how". The "how" can be done by any committer, but if the "what" is still being discussed, you really have no saying over the "how" yet. Basically, no one will ever question an implementation decision until the spec w

iPOJO still alive?

Hi, I would welcome your response to these questions: 1) Is the iPOJO project still alive? I'm asking because the last version, 1.12.1, was released in the end of 2014. 2) Does anyone have experience with iPOJO + BndTools? Do they work well together? Many thanks in advance! Tim Lee

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

On 1/18/17 15:28 , Guillaume Nodet wrote: 2017-01-18 20:23 GMT+01:00 Richard S. Hall : On 1/18/17 14:06 , Guillaume Nodet wrote: Let's take a clearer example, as I have a feeling I'm still not understood correctly. My problem is definitely not the fact that there is an implementation based o

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

2017-01-18 20:23 GMT+01:00 Richard S. Hall : > On 1/18/17 14:06 , Guillaume Nodet wrote: > >> Let's take a clearer example, as I have a feeling I'm still not understood >> correctly. My problem is definitely not the fact that there is an >> implementation based on an unreleased spec or RFC (as my

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

Richard S. Hall wrote > On 1/18/17 14:06 , Guillaume Nodet wrote: >> Let's take a clearer example, as I have a feeling I'm still not >> understood >> correctly. My problem is definitely not the fact that there is an >> implementation based on an unreleased spec or RFC (as my email title >> seemed

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

On 1/18/17 14:06 , Guillaume Nodet wrote: Let's take a clearer example, as I have a feeling I'm still not understood correctly. My problem is definitely not the fact that there is an implementation based on an unreleased spec or RFC (as my email title seemed to indicate). If a committer comes a

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

But this is exactly what is happening for many in-flight specifications and no one has ever complained! - tx-control - push streams - configurator - converter - etc. - Ray On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: > Let's take a clearer example, as I have a feeling I'm still not

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

Let's take a clearer example, as I have a feeling I'm still not understood correctly. My problem is definitely not the fact that there is an implementation based on an unreleased spec or RFC (as my email title seemed to indicate). If a committer comes and say : I'd like to implement rfc-xxx based

[jira] [Commented] (FELIX-5491) Serializer should allow empty key/values pairs when parsing

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5491?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15828433#comment-15828433 ] David Leangen commented on FELIX-5491: -- I was not able to "prove" one of the changes,

[jira] [Comment Edited] (FELIX-5491) Serializer should allow empty key/values pairs when parsing

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5491?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15828433#comment-15828433 ] David Leangen edited comment on FELIX-5491 at 1/18/17 5:27 PM: -

ApacheCon CFP closing soon (11 February)

Hello, fellow Apache enthusiast. Thanks for your participation, and interest in, the projects of the Apache Software Foundation. I wanted to remind you that the Call For Papers (CFP) for ApacheCon North America, and Apache: Big Data North America, closes in less than a month. If you've been puttin

[GitHub] felix pull request #84: Schematizer POM requires updates

Github user dleangen closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/felix/pull/84 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enab

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Felix DS Web Console Plugin 2.0.6

+1 David On 18 January 2017 at 15:13, Carsten Ziegeler wrote: > Hi, > > We solved 4 issues in this release > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/releases/org.apache. > felix.webconsole.plugins.ds-2.0.6/changelog.txt > > > Staging repository: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositori

[jira] [Updated] (FELIX-5492) Schematizer POM requires updates

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5492?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] David Leangen updated FELIX-5492: - Labels: (was: PR) > Schematizer POM requires updates > > >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Felix DS Web Console Plugin 2.0.6

+1 (non-binding) On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Carsten Ziegeler wrote: > +1 > > > > -- > Carsten Ziegeler > Adobe Research Switzerland > cziege...@apache.org > -- *Raymond Augé* (@rotty3000) Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.*

[jira] [Updated] (FELIX-5499) Remove usage of json.org from dependency manager

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5499?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Pierre De Rop updated FELIX-5499: - Fix Version/s: (was: dependencymanager-4.3.0) org.apache.felix.dependencyman

[jira] [Updated] (FELIX-5499) Remove usage of json.org from dependency manager

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5499?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Pierre De Rop updated FELIX-5499: - Affects Version/s: org.apache.felix.dependencymanager-r1 > Remove usage of json.org from dependenc

[jira] [Updated] (FELIX-5499) Remove usage of json.org from dependency manager

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5499?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Pierre De Rop updated FELIX-5499: - Component/s: (was: Dependency Manager) Dependency Manager Runtime

[jira] [Assigned] (FELIX-5499) Remove usage of json.org from dependency manager

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5499?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Pierre De Rop reassigned FELIX-5499: Assignee: Pierre De Rop > Remove usage of json.org from dependency manager > --

[jira] [Commented] (FELIX-5499) Remove usage of json.org from dependency manager

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5499?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15828242#comment-15828242 ] Pierre De Rop commented on FELIX-5499: -- Thanks Carsten for reporting. I will read car

[jira] [Commented] (FELIX-5499) Remove usage of json.org from dependency manager

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5499?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15828250#comment-15828250 ] Carsten Ziegeler commented on FELIX-5499: - [~pderop] Yes, you can simply replace i

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Felix DS Web Console Plugin 2.0.6

+1 -- Carsten Ziegeler Adobe Research Switzerland cziege...@apache.org

[VOTE] Release Apache Felix DS Web Console Plugin 2.0.6

Hi, We solved 4 issues in this release https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/releases/org.apache.felix.webconsole.plugins.ds-2.0.6/changelog.txt Staging repository: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-1162/ You can use this UNIX script to download the release and

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

On 1/18/17 08:55 , Guillaume Nodet wrote: 2017-01-18 14:29 GMT+01:00 Richard S. Hall : On 1/18/17 08:22 , Guillaume Nodet wrote: 2017-01-18 13:53 GMT+01:00 Carsten Ziegeler : Whoever is doing the RI does it somewhere else and might do a code contribution or not. Yes, that definitely wou

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

To a degree it also applies to any other spec but it is only visible when the spec is changing a lot. As we basically take the jax rs spec as given and static in this project there is not much pain in being not in the loop. For the jax-rs-whiteboard spec it is different as it is more of a movin

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

> On 18 Jan 2017, at 12:36, Guillaume Nodet wrote: > > Fwiw, I think Christian was referring to the JAX-RS WHITEBOARD, not the > JAX-RS spec itself. > That one is an RFC from the OSGi Alliance... RFC-127 afaik. This is pretty much my point. Why raise an issue with the “Whiteboard” half of “JA

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

Ok, assuming that the OSGi Alliance is not changing its model of working, what do you propose to do? Carsten Guillaume Nodet wrote > It seems either I have a hard time explaining myself, or you're all blind. > I'll suppose the first one, so I'll try again. > > Let's say someone comes to aries or

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

It seems either I have a hard time explaining myself, or you're all blind. I'll suppose the first one, so I'll try again. Let's say someone comes to aries or felix saying: "i'd like to work on a RI for the xxx rfc". At this point, that's fine if the RFC is kinda frozen. Let's imagine it's not, an

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

Guillaume Nodet wrote > >> There is no difference? Really? Claiming the current approach is not >> optimal from a community perspective is certainly not unreasonable, but >> saying that the community doesn't benefit at all from having draft >> implementations being worked on at Apache seems like a

Re: Removing json.org dependency from webconsole and plugins

Achim Nierbeck wrote > Hi, > > just trying to be the devil's advocate :) > > Even if it's a small piece of code just for writing JSON, do we really > re-invent the wheel again? > Don't know if you where aware of, but there is an Apache JSON lib > available, and it does have the proper imports/exp

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

2017-01-18 14:29 GMT+01:00 Richard S. Hall : > On 1/18/17 08:22 , Guillaume Nodet wrote: > >> 2017-01-18 13:53 GMT+01:00 Carsten Ziegeler : >> >> Whoever is doing the RI >>> does it somewhere else and might do a code contribution or not. >>> >> >> Yes, that definitely would avoid the problem. >> A

Re: Removing json.org dependency from webconsole and plugins

Hi, just trying to be the devil's advocate :) Even if it's a small piece of code just for writing JSON, do we really re-invent the wheel again? Don't know if you where aware of, but there is an Apache JSON lib available, and it does have the proper imports/exports ;) Apache Johnzon [1] regards,

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

2017-01-18 11:59 GMT+01:00 David Bosschaert : > Hi Guillaume, > > First of all, the OSGi Alliance is a very open standards development > organization. Any organisation can join. RFPs and RFCs are developed in the > open, specs are available for free and are free to be implemented by > anyone. > >

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

On 1/18/17 08:22 , Guillaume Nodet wrote: 2017-01-18 13:53 GMT+01:00 Carsten Ziegeler : Whoever is doing the RI does it somewhere else and might do a code contribution or not. Yes, that definitely would avoid the problem. And I don't think it changes anything from the contributor point of vie

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

2017-01-18 13:53 GMT+01:00 Carsten Ziegeler : > Guillaume Nodet wrote > > > > Again, I'm talking about using Apache to develop the will-be reference > > implementation of the being-designed spec. When the rfc is undergoing > > changes, the RI, as you say, is an experimental project to make sure

[jira] [Updated] (FELIX-5499) Remove usage of json.org from dependency manager

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5499?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Carsten Ziegeler updated FELIX-5499: Priority: Blocker (was: Major) > Remove usage of json.org from dependency manager > ---

[jira] [Created] (FELIX-5499) Remove usage of json.org from dependency manager

Carsten Ziegeler created FELIX-5499: --- Summary: Remove usage of json.org from dependency manager Key: FELIX-5499 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5499 Project: Felix Issue Ty

[jira] [Updated] (FELIX-5499) Remove usage of json.org from dependency manager

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5499?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Carsten Ziegeler updated FELIX-5499: Fix Version/s: dependencymanager-4.3.0 > Remove usage of json.org from dependency manager >

Removing json.org dependency from webconsole and plugins

Hi, as Jim has explained in [1] we have to remove the usage of the json.org library from our code base as the licence is not in the excepted category anymore. This does not affect released code. Now, before we get into a discussion about the best json library on earth, let's reduce the discussion

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

Guillaume Nodet wrote > > Again, I'm talking about using Apache to develop the will-be reference > implementation of the being-designed spec. When the rfc is undergoing > changes, the RI, as you say, is an experimental project to make sure the > RFC properly address all problems and can be turne

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

> I'm not talking about developing an implementation of a publicly released > specification. I have absolutely no problem with that of course. How is that different from developing an implementation for a publicly released DRAFT specification? In both cases you create an implementation for someth

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

RFC-217 sorry https://github.com/osgi/design/tree/master/rfcs/rfc0217 2017-01-18 13:36 GMT+01:00 Guillaume Nodet : > Fwiw, I think Christian was referring to the JAX-RS WHITEBOARD, not the > JAX-RS spec itself. > That one is an RFC from the OSGi Alliance... RFC-127 afaik. > > 2017-01-18 13:

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

2017-01-18 13:22 GMT+01:00 Neil Bartlett : > Guillaume, you seem to be working from out of date information. All RFPs > and RFCs are publicly available, including those that are still being > developed. They are here: https://github.com/osgi/design/. This has been > the case for at least four year

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

Fwiw, I think Christian was referring to the JAX-RS WHITEBOARD, not the JAX-RS spec itself. That one is an RFC from the OSGi Alliance... RFC-127 afaik. 2017-01-18 13:34 GMT+01:00 Neil Bartlett : > Christian, your example of JAX-RS Whiteboard is fascinating, because > JAX-RS was designed by the E

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

Christian, your example of JAX-RS Whiteboard is fascinating, because JAX-RS was designed by the Expert Groups of the JCP, not by the Apache community. The same is true of many of the JavaEE specifications implemented within Apache. So, Apache has always worked pragmatically to implement specific

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

Guillaume, you seem to be working from out of date information. All RFPs and RFCs are publicly available, including those that are still being developed. They are here: https://github.com/osgi/design/. This has been the case for at least four years now. Given this, I don’t see any impediment to

[jira] [Resolved] (FELIX-5492) Schematizer POM requires updates

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5492?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] David Bosschaert resolved FELIX-5492. - Resolution: Fixed Assignee: David Bosschaert Many thanks [~dleangen], your patch is

[jira] [Commented] (FELIX-5491) Serializer should allow empty key/values pairs when parsing

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5491?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15827938#comment-15827938 ] David Bosschaert commented on FELIX-5491: - Hi [~dleangen], The code changes look

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

I agree with Guillaume that the way the specs are defined is not fully compatible to the way apache projects are managed. In apache the idea is that the design of a component is defined by the community. Like in jax-rs-whiteboard .. if it was a pure apache thing then changes in the interfaces

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

2017-01-18 11:46 GMT+01:00 Neil Bartlett : > Guillaume, > > All OSGi specifications in progress are publicly visible, so in what sense > are Apache community members unable to be involved in the development of > the RIs? > I'm not talking about developing an implementation of a publicly released

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

Hi all And we should also mention that quite a number of active community members actually working on those things are members (or employees of members) of the OSGi alliance and as such open to feedback received from the communities on the evolution of the specifications. As such, I think it i

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

Hi Guillaume, First of all, the OSGi Alliance is a very open standards development organization. Any organisation can join. RFPs and RFCs are developed in the open, specs are available for free and are free to be implemented by anyone. There is also an open feedback channel available where everyo

Re: Implementation of unreleased spec and community

Guillaume, All OSGi specifications in progress are publicly visible, so in what sense are Apache community members unable to be involved in the development of the RIs? Regards, Neil > On 18 Jan 2017, at 10:41, Guillaume Nodet wrote: > > I'm a bit concerned by some subprojects in our communiti

Implementation of unreleased spec and community

I'm a bit concerned by some subprojects in our communities. The ASF is supposed to be "community over code", so the very basic thing for a project is that people can get involved. However, I see more and more code developped as a reference implementation of a spec which is not publicly available,

[jira] [Resolved] (FELIX-5498) [gogo][jline] The shell should display exception thrown from commands

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5498?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Guillaume Nodet resolved FELIX-5498. Resolution: Fixed Committing to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk ... M

[jira] [Created] (FELIX-5498) [gogo][jline] The shell should display exception thrown from commands

Guillaume Nodet created FELIX-5498: -- Summary: [gogo][jline] The shell should display exception thrown from commands Key: FELIX-5498 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5498 Project: Feli