[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AW: [equinox-dev] Packaging opensource libraries as osgi bundles
- From: "Neil Bartlett" <njbartlett@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 15:18:54 -0000 (GMT)
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Importance: Normal
- User-agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.5
Piero's original email did mention Orbit, and noted that it can only
contain Eclipse-approved libraries. A more general repository would be
very useful, as it could include libraries that Eclipse projects will
never be allowed to use, eg the GPL-licensed ones etc.
There's not necessarily much of a technical challenge here, it's more a
problem of hosting costs. I think it would be a great thing for the OSGi
Alliance to sponsor such an effort since it would ease the migration path
for developers moving to OSGi.
Even better would be if more open source projects could be convinced to
offer bundle-ized distributions themselves. Again I think the Alliance
might have a role to play.
After all, what else have they got to spend those $20k/year membership
fees on? ;-)
> see the Orbit project
> "Ziegler, Alexander " <Alexander.Ziegler@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent by: equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> 11/10/2006 03:51 AM
> Please respond to
> Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> <pc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Equinox development mailing list"
> AW: [equinox-dev] Packaging opensource libraries as osgi bundles Hi,
> to package opensource a) libraries into bundles sounds good. It is
encouraging bundle like developing. Which opensource libraries could
canditates? All? e.g. like the Maven public repository? Maintaining a
repository of opensource bundles can become expensive depend the amount of
> opensource libraries and those different release cycles. To adopt
> for opensource libraries feels more difficult for me because you have to
define contracts and interfaces whose have to fulfil all requirements and
> to maintaining the stuff if some requirement change. Opensource
> have different APIs, different concepts how to use. Maybe for some
libraries it is better to whose by classes directly.
> Best Regards
> Von: equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Piero Campanelli
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 9. November 2006 17:48
> An: osgi-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx;
> Betreff: [equinox-dev] Packaging opensource libraries as osgi bundles Hi,
> I am reflecting to the fact that it would be nice if a set of opensource
projects (starting from most used/trendy) would be packaged as osgi
bundles and keeped them in a repository. ( bundles.osgi.org for example or
> any other). I see interesting the Eclipse Orbit initiative which is
however devoted only to "eclipse-related" libraries.
> Clearly the problem of maintaining this repository would be high but the
benefits for osgi adoption could be interesting (specially when people see
> that with osgi they are able to manage lot of lines code more easily
> traditional approach).
> What do you think about that?
> As exercise I am starting porting existing opensource libraries as OSGi
bundles. I think there are two level of adoption:
> a) package "components" as osgi bundles and keep tracks of dependencies
> b) adopt a service oriented approach (using osgi registry or declarative
> a) can be done easily and I think can also be maintained externally from
the main trunk of the project (if project is well modularized). b) should
> be adopted from project team :)
> equinox-dev mailing list
> equinox-dev mailing list