[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [equinox-dev] Replaceable OSGi runtime

Gorkem Ercan wrote on 11/03/2006 09:05:27 AM:

> 1. Services provided by the equinox, namely FrameworkLog,
> PluginConverter, PlatformAdmin, PluginConverter, BundleLocalization,
> Location, URLConverter, EnvironmentInfo are not specified in OSGi
> specifications and they should be available independent from equinox
> core. I guess there are several ways to provide that as interfaces to
> be provided by the replacing OSGi implementation or as a separate
> bundle that provides those in an equinox independent way.

Yup.  This is what we are addressing right now.  Your input on the solution would be great.  DJ will likely be posting some information on this next week.  

> 2.Startup initialization which initializes system properties and loads
> configurations from the file system needs to be taken out of
> org.eclipse.core.launcher.Main and
> org.eclipse.core.runtime.adaptor.EclipseStarter so that a replacement
> framework can call these initializations. This way, the initialization
> can be done easy without any further knowledge of the steps taken by
> Equinox.

Not sure I agree with you here.  The setup of a framework currently is not standard so Main and EclipseStarter are very particular to Equinox.  The properties and other configurations they setup are also particular to Equinox.  Some of the properties that are setup are used by some of the Equinox framework services and should be set in a fashion appropriate for each framework.  For example, setting osgi.configrution.area and osgi.instance.area may be different for Felix, KF, Prosyst, ...  Do you have some concrete examples of what can/should be separated out?

> 3.The bundles should not assume that the org.eclipse.osgi bundle is
> the System Bundle so that it is possible to replace equinox bundle.

yes.  This is a wide scoped issue. When you find a bundle that requires org.eclipse.osgi you should enter a bug report against the relevant team and advise them of the value of Import-Package in these scenarios.

> Also there are other issues like what to do with the 2.0 compatability
> issues and the situation with the exploded bundles which are not
> really supported by OSGi spec.

2.0 compatibility?

Exploded bundles are certainly not spec'd (though I don't think the spec prohibits them in any way) but all open source frameworks currently support that form (as well as install by reference AFAIK).  This is really a framework implementation issue that we can't help you with.