Hi,
 
> I'd like to get people's thoughts on whether the idea of 'promoting'
> OSGi is a good one, 
IMHO support of OSGi is very important and I glad to see increasing interest of 
the community here. 

> and get ideas on how best to proceed. 
I personally have currently not a very deep insight into implementation details 
yet, but we are currently prototyping and have there also OSGi services. 
What I could offer today is only to feed our findings about limitations and 
rooms for improvement back.
Another important thing which I see on the horizon, is the ongoing 
standardization of Distributed OSGi (RFC119) and the benefit to support that 
standard in Tuscany's OSGi bits. So from mid-term perspective I suggest to keep 
an eye on that as well.

Regards,
Philipp

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Graham Charters [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Gesendet: Montag, 28. April 2008 09:48
An: [email protected]
Betreff: Improving support for running in OSGi

Hi All,

I'd like to get more involved in the OSGi support in Tuscany (both the
modularity work (itest/osgi-tuscany) and the implementation.osgi).  I
recently started looking at the work to run Tuscany in OSGi, embodied
in itest/osgi-tuscany and described in the thread entitled
"Classloading in Tuscany".  I've noticed a couple of others on the
list also interested in Tuscany running in OSGi and wondered if it
might be worth considering making this a "first-class" option.  At the
moment the five bundles are only built by folks who want the OSGi
support and go into the itest/osgi-tuscany directory to create it.
This can result in any problems being discovered late, but also could
create the impression that OSGi is considered a second-class
environment (which I don't believe is the case).

Aside from the obvious benefits to OSGi users in doing this, I think
there's a potential for Tuscany to use the OSGi build as a test-bed
for highlighting and working through modularity issues, which would
also benefit Tuscany in general, not just in an OSGi runtime.

I'd like to get people's thoughts on whether the idea of 'promoting'
OSGi is a good one, and get ideas on how best to proceed.  We could
then start discussing what some of the issues might be (e.g. size of
builds, time to build, etc...).

Regards,

Graham.

Reply via email to