On 6/21/07, Graham Charters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
I still think that explicit bindings are better. I still think both approaches are valid and it depends on what you're trying to achieve :-) . If you're trying to include OSGi bundles in your SCA domain, the only way to do this is with implementation.osgi. If you're trying to create a peer environment where you interoperate with OSGi bundles but they are not managed by SCA, then binding.osgi makes sense. > > What do the others on the list think? >
I'd like to see both approaches implemented in Tuscany :) At least then we have the opportunity to experiment with trying both out which may help highlight the various advantages and disadvantages of each in different scenarios. Now that we have working code from implementation.osgi that can be borrowed from it should not be so difficult to get a binding going. OSGi support has missed the 0.91 release but it would be good to get this in the next release (0.92 in August?) with support for both implementation and binding and some good doc and samples. Would any of you be interested in helping with that? ...ant
