Re: [equinox-dev] Re: equinox-dev Digest, Vol 26, Issue 26

[Jeff McAffer <Jeff_McAffer@xxxxxxxxxx>]

One clarification, Equinox is the reference
implementation for *parts* of the OSGi spec.  The framework and various
services.

Jeff

Ken Gilmer <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

06/18/2007 09:49 AM

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

To	cross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc	equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject	[equinox-dev] Re: equinox-dev Digest, Vol 26, Issue 26

Cameron,

   Another plus for Equinox is that it's considered to be the  
reference (R4) implementation of the OSGi specification.  Looking
 
back through this mail-list or the newsgroup will give you a good  
idea of the large magnitude of people banging on it.  Since Richard
 
mentioned Felix, I feel less guilty about a small plug for  
Concierge.  It's a R3 implementation that is considerably smaller
and  
simpler, and now includes some PDE-like tooling to boot:  http://
concierge.sourceforge.net/.

Best of luck
-ken

On Jun 16, 2007, at 12:00 PM, equinox-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> Send equinox-dev mailing list submissions to
>                  equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>                  https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>                  equinox-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>                  equinox-dev-owner@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of equinox-dev digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. How much effort has gone into developing Equinox (Cameron
Ross)
>    2. Re: How much effort has gone into developing Equinox
>       (Jeremy Volkman)
>    3. Re: How much effort has gone into developing Equinox
>       (John Arthorne)
>    4. Re: How much effort has gone into developing Equinox
>       (Richard S. Hall)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:46:57 -0400
> From: "Cameron Ross" <cross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [equinox-dev] How much effort has gone into developing
>                  Equinox
> To: <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <00ab01c7af85$efb00570$e301a8c0@symbot1>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm building a case for using Equinox as opposed to in-house  
> development of
> a plugin framework.  Can someone given a reasonable estimate
as to  
> how many
> person hours have gone into the development of Equinox?  Also,
are  
> there any
> estimates as to the number of Equinox installations that there are
 
> out there
> (i.e. deployment footprint)?  This information would help to
 
> support my
> arguments for using Equinox.
>
> Thanks much,
> Cameron Ross
> President, Symboticware
> Program Lead, Interoperable Systems, MIRARCO
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev/ 
> attachments/20070615/deb2a03d/attachment.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:04:22 -0400
> From: "Jeremy Volkman" <jvolkman@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [equinox-dev] How much effort has gone into developing
>                  Equinox
> To: "Equinox development mailing list" <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID:
>                  <dccc2ca90706151304j34ffd18v4f023c19106d9184@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Also take into consideration the amount of time put into developing
> the OSGi spec itself, and not just a particular implementation.  The
> OSGi spec has been in continuous development since 1998.  Take
a look
> at Peter Kriens' review of JSR-277 (Java Module System), which is
> bypassing the OSGi spec and attempting to solve the same fundamental
> problem from scratch:
> http://www.osgi.org/blog/2006/10/jsr-277-review.html
>
>  -Jeremy
>
> On 6/15/07, Cameron Ross <cross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'm building a case for using Equinox as opposed to in-house  
>> development of
>> a plugin framework.  Can someone given a reasonable estimate
as to  
>> how many
>> person hours have gone into the development of Equinox?  Also,
are  
>> there any
>> estimates as to the number of Equinox installations that there
are  
>> out there
>> (i.e. deployment footprint)?  This information would help
to  
>> support my
>> arguments for using Equinox.
>>
>> Thanks much,
>> Cameron Ross
>> President, Symboticware
>> Program Lead, Interoperable Systems, MIRARCO
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> equinox-dev mailing list
>> equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:37:50 -0400
> From: John Arthorne <John_Arthorne@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [equinox-dev] How much effort has gone into developing
>                  Equinox
> To: Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID:
>                  <OF8193B293.12E57A5E-ON852572FB.006FEEBB-852572FB.
> 0071537F@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> According to ohloh.net, 15 person years have gone into Equinox.  
> This is a
> drastic underestimate, since Equinox is comprised of code from the
> original Eclipse platform project (2000 person years and counting),
 
> and
> various other code contributions. The ohloh figure only captures  
> the core
> Equinox OSGi implementation, and not the various other equinox bundles
> that provide services on top:
>
> http://www.ohloh.net/projects/3505
> http://www.ohloh.net/projects/3855
>
> As for install base, I'd venture a guess in the range of a hundred
> million. The Eclipse platform built on Equinox has millions of  
> downloads a
> year, and then there are the hundreds of commercial and open source
> products built on it.  This is a vast install space, including
desktop
> apps, server-side apps, embedded apps, etc. You'll also find an  
> equinox
> implementation or two in most linux distros. This is a pure guess
-  
> don't
> quote me on it.
>
>
>
>
>
> "Cameron Ross" <cross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent by: equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> 06/15/2007 03:46 PM
> Please respond to
> Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> To
> <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> cc
>
> Subject
> [equinox-dev] How much effort has gone into developing Equinox
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm building a case for using Equinox as opposed to in-house  
> development
> of a plugin framework.  Can someone given a reasonable estimate
as  
> to how
> many person hours have gone into the development of Equinox?  Also,
 
> are
> there any estimates as to the number of Equinox installations that
 
> there
> are out there (i.e. deployment footprint)?  This information
would  
> help to
> support my arguments for using Equinox.
>
> Thanks much,
> Cameron Ross
> President, Symboticware
> Program Lead, Interoperable Systems, MIRARCO
> _______________________________________________
> equinox-dev mailing list
> equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev/ 
> attachments/20070615/cda5f13a/attachment.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 17:14:38 -0400
> From: "Richard S. Hall" <heavy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [equinox-dev] How much effort has gone into developing
>                  Equinox
> To: Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <4673013E.10904@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> In short, you'd be a fool to start from scratch. :-)
>
> People generally think they can make a simpler implementation for
 
> their
> own usage, which is generally true. But over time your use cases  
> expand
> and you end up creating something just as complex to handle all of
 
> your
> use cases. If your issues are dynamic extensibility, then your best
 
> bet
> at this point is the OSGi framework, since it has thought about nearly
> all of the issues (although not solved all of them yet).
>
> In addition, you can then choose from multiple implementations...
 
> (ahem,
> Apache Felix)  ;-)
>
> -> richard
>
> John Arthorne wrote:
>>
>> According to ohloh.net, 15 person years have gone into Equinox.
 This
>> is a drastic underestimate, since Equinox is comprised of code
from
>> the original Eclipse platform project (2000 person years and
>> counting), and various other code contributions. The ohloh figure
 
>> only
>> captures the core Equinox OSGi implementation, and not the various
>> other equinox bundles that provide services on top:
>>
>> http://www.ohloh.net/projects/3505
>> http://www.ohloh.net/projects/3855
>>
>> As for install base, I'd venture a guess in the range of a hundred
>> million. The Eclipse platform built on Equinox has millions of
>> downloads a year, and then there are the hundreds of commercial
and
>> open source products built on it.  This is a vast install
space,
>> including desktop apps, server-side apps, embedded apps, etc.
You'll
>> also find an equinox implementation or two in most linux distros.
 
>> This
>> is a pure guess - don't quote me on it.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *"Cameron Ross" <cross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>*
>> Sent by: equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> 06/15/2007 03:46 PM
>> Please respond to
>> Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>>
>>                
 
>> To
>>                
 <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> cc
>>                
 
>> Subject
>>                
 [equinox-dev] How much effort has gone into developing Equinox
>>
>>
>>
>>                
 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'm building a case for using Equinox as opposed to in-house
>> development of a plugin framework.  Can someone given a reasonable
>> estimate as to how many person hours have gone into the  
>> development of
>> Equinox?  Also, are there any estimates as to the number
of Equinox
>> installations that there are out there (i.e. deployment footprint)?
>>  This information would help to support my arguments for
using  
>> Equinox.
>>
>> Thanks much,
>> Cameron Ross
>> President, Symboticware
>> Program Lead, Interoperable Systems,
>> MIRARCO_______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
> End of equinox-dev Digest, Vol 26, Issue 26
> *******************************************

_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev