[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [ecf-dev] ECF 3.5 Release Presentation - Please Review

Hi all,

Scott, thank you for the review. I added your changes to the document.

I also commited a first draft of the New and Noteworthy page. It
mainly consists of the information from the slides. Please review this
page, too. As it's a text-based file, feel free to commit changes
directly. You may also give feedback at the list and I'll help to
complete the information.

Cheers,

Sebastian


On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 12:51 AM, Scott Lewis <slewis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Sebastian,
>
> The slides look great. Thanks again for doing this. Here's a couple of
> additional comments/suggestions/additions:
>
> Slide 2:
>
> Item: Implementation of OSGi 4.2 enterprise spec chapter 122
> Change to read: Full implementation of OSGi 4.2 Remote Service Admin (RSA),
> chapter 122 in enterprise specification
>
> Item: Allows consumers to easily introduce discovery/distribution systems
> using ECF‘s provider architecture.
> Change to read: Allows consumers to easily replace discover and distribution
> systems using ECF‘s provider architecture
>
> Item: obsoletes ECF file-based discovery
> Change to read: Standardized OSGi endpoint description extender format
> (section 122.8) obsoletes old/RFC 119-based format
>
> Item: From Scott Lewis
> Change to read: Contributed by Scott Lewis/Composent, Inc.
> (and same for Pavel Samolisov contribution of xmlrpc)
>
> Item: Supports remote service invocation through a proxy
> Change to read: Supports remote service invocation through a proxy and/or
> async proxy
>
> All other slides look great to me!
>
> I think a new slide should be introduced ...perhaps after IP Issues slide:
>
> Title: ECF and Standards
>
> Bullets:
> OSGi 4.2 Remote Services...aka chapter 13 in compendium
> OSGi 4.2 Remote Service Admin...aka chapter 122 in enterprise specification
> Both are full/complete implementation of OSGi specification
> Only known implementation to support pluggable discovery and distribution
> providers within standard
> Only impl of these specs among EF projects
> Standards support requested by ECF consumer community
>
> ECF also supports a number of other standard protocols...e.g. http, ftp for
> async file transfer, xmpp for presence/IM, JMS for pub/sub messaging,
> others.
>
> Thanks again Sebastian.
>
> Scott
>
>
> On 2/27/2011 3:10 AM, Sebastian Schmidt wrote:
>>
>> Hi Scott,
>>
>> thank you for the explanation. I added this as a comment to the slides.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Sebastian
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 2:42 AM, Scott Lewis<slewis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Sebastian,
>>>
>>> What Markus is referring to is that both he and I have been working with
>>> the
>>> Eclipse Foundation to get access to the OSGi remoteservices TCK (test
>>> compatibility kit I think).  We would like to run the TCK on the ECF
>>> Remote
>>> Services Admin implementation...going out with 3.5...to verify that it is
>>> fully compliant with the specification.
>>>
>>> The Eclipse Foundation has access to the TCK now (there was a licensing
>>> issue with OSGi that has been worked out), and they are doing something
>>> else
>>> to satisfy licensing requirements and org requirements before we can
>>> use/run
>>> it on our implementation...i.e. their legal work is not yet complete.
>>>
>>> So, the short story is that although we expect to run the TCK very soon
>>> now,
>>> we can't run it until EF gives us access...and probably won't be able to
>>> run
>>> the TCK on ECF's implementation prior to ECF 3.5 release...because the EF
>>> hasn't completed what they need to complete.
>>>
>>> Scott
>>>
>>> On 2/26/2011 3:20 PM, Sebastian Schmidt wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Markus,
>>>>
>>>> thank you for the review. I added your changes except for
>>>>
>>>>> - Add something along the lines of spec compliance WRT OSGi
>>>>> remoteservices TCK (Work has started in the 3.5 time frame but could
>>>>> not
>>>>> be completed due to lawyers and such ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, didn't really get that one :-)
>>>>
>>>> Sebastian
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> ecf-dev mailing list
>>>> ecf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ecf-dev
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ecf-dev mailing list
>>> ecf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ecf-dev
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ecf-dev mailing list
>> ecf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ecf-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> ecf-dev mailing list
> ecf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ecf-dev
>