[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [equinox-dev] Status of Equinox respect to OSGi R4


yes you are right I should have qualified/scoped that statement.  I focused on the framework portions of the core spec and believe that are "fully compliant" on all portions related to the framework.

It might be interesting if OSGi defined a notion of fully compliant or perhaps other ways of talking about compliance.  It is not clear how many people would be able to (or want to) claim "full" compliance.  As OSGi spreads its wings the set of spec'd services grows broader and broader.  Who would implement all of MEG, VEG, CPEG and now EEG spec'd services?  Perhaps a few people?  Even within one EG there are services that are quite unrelated.  

It would be unfortunate if people started saying "Hmmm, we shouldn't use Felix/Equinox/... because it is not *fully* compliant" (wrt all OSGi specs or even just CPEG).  It seems anti-thematic to talk about certifying collections of loosely coupled components.  Let each component stand on its merits and talk about its status.

Jeff



"Richard S. Hall" <heavy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

10/06/2006 06:15 PM

Please respond to
Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

To
Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject
Re: [equinox-dev] Status of Equinox respect to OSGi R4





Jeff McAffer wrote:
>
> Equinox is the R4 reference implementation so yes, it is compliant

Isn't it possible that such an answer could be misconstrued? Equinox
does not implement every aspect of the R4 specification. Granted,
Equinox implements a very large portion of it, but it seems more
forthright to be clear about what it means to be "fully" compliant,
which is what was asked.

-> richard

>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> *"Piero Campanelli" <pierocampanelli@xxxxxxxxx>*
> Sent by: equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> 10/06/2006 04:19 PM
> Please respond to
> pc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Please respond to
> Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
>                  
> To
>                  equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> cc
>                  
> Subject
>                  [equinox-dev] Status of Equinox respect to OSGi R4
>
>
>
>                  
>
>
>
>
>
> What's the status of Equinox respect to R4 spec? Is equinox
> fully-compliant? According this page not yet.._
> __http://www.eclipse.org/equinox/bundles/_
>
> right?
>
> _______________________________________________
> equinox-dev mailing list
> equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> equinox-dev mailing list
> equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
>  
_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev