Hi JB, The good news is that as of the beginning of this year, OSGi is now at Eclipse [5]. The specification project is hosted at https://github.com/osgi/osgi and the working group details are at [6]. Anyone can join in the spec project calls (see the calendar at [7]), join the mailing list [8] and provide PRs on the project - it just works as a regular Eclipse opensource project. JB (and others) you can just join these :)
It's very common and actually really good if multiple technologies already exist that relate to a spec. This is one of the reasons where a specification makes a lot of sense. In the case of Features a number of technologies already existed in this area, including Sling Features, Karaf Features, Eclipse Features and others. As Karl mentioned, hopefully these technologies will support OSGi Features in the future. The implementation of the OSGi Features that I worked on is a very small 'compatible' implementation. It doesn't have all the bells and whistles that other implementations have. But it provides an implementation of the API defined in the spec. In order for the OSGi spec at Eclipse to be released there needs to be at least one Compatible Implementation. So in summary the benefits are: * OSGi at Eclipse is open for all now * The proposed implementation would allow the spec to be released - which helps if other projects would like to support it too * Having this implementation in Felix would avoid any confusion around naming, which was flagged by the Sling community - as there would only be one Features implementation at Felix. JB, all, I hope you see the benefits. Best regards, David [5] https://projects.eclipse.org/proposals/osgi-specification-project [6] https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/technology.osgi [7] https://calendar.google.com/calendar/embed?src=c_fh3lhb5p0l29f6phu2ndifh4a4%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America%2FToronto [8] https://accounts.eclipse.org/mailing-list/osgi-dev On Wed, 11 Aug 2021 at 10:08, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote: > I understand the purpose, however where I'm really concern is the fact > that the OSGi Alliance is doing spec without considering existing > implementations. > > I would love to have been involved in the features spec definition, but > it's not possible as an individual, or as ASF member. > > Karaf features exist for 10+ years now, and I remember discussion with > some OSGi people while ago saying "it's useless, it doesn't make sense > with OSGi, Karaf is so so, blabla". And now we have a spec providing > quite the same. > I'm sorry to be upset, but this time, it doesn't sound fair to me. > > For Karaf, as we started effort heading to Karaf 5, it could be a good > timing to leverage OSGi Features (we can have Karaf 5 service for Karaf > features, and another one for OSGi Features, letting users to choose > which one they want to use). > > So +0 about having to it in Felix (I can't give +1 regarding what I just > wrote ;)). > > Regards > JB > > On 11/08/2021 10:56, Karl Pauls wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 10:51 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> Hi David, > >> > >> I'm skeptical about that: > >> > >> 1. It looks pretty similar to Karaf Features, so, why not having it in > >> Karaf ? > >> 2. The naming could be confusing between Karaf Features and OSGi > Features > >> > >> I think it makes more sense to have this in Karaf as it already almost > >> exists in Karaf for a while. > > > > It does exist in sling for quite a while as well... > > > > I guess in a nutshell, we have two things called features: karaf > > features and sling features. Now, there is an effort to have a spec in > > the area (namely, OSGi features). > > > > As far as I'm concerned, putting the spec work into either sling or > > karaf seems a little confusing - if we do it at Felix, we have a more > > neutral ground and in the end, hopefully, both, karaf and sling can > > support OSGi features as part of their features. > > > > regards, > > > > Karl > > > >> Regards > >> JB > >> > >> On 11/08/2021 10:42, [email protected] wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> As many of you know, work is happening on the next OSGi Compendium R8 > >>> specifications [1]. > >>> > >>> One of the new specifications is the OSGi Feature Service (chapter 159) > >>> [2]. I have been working on a compatible implementation in the Sling > >>> Whiteboard [3]. My interest in this came from the Sling Feature model > and > >>> initially I thought a logical place for the implementation would be in > >>> Sling. > >>> However after some discussion at the Sling Dev list, the conclusion was > >>> that this OSGi spec compatible implementation would be better hosted > at a > >>> more general OSGi community, like Apache Felix [4]. > >>> > >>> Therefore I would propose to host this implementation as an Apache > Felix > >>> subproject. For example in the 'features' subdirectory of the Felix > >>> codebase. > >>> > >>> WDYT? > >>> > >>> Kind regards, > >>> > >>> David > >>> > >>> [1] Current draft at: https://osgi.github.io/osgi/cmpn/ > >>> [2] https://osgi.github.io/osgi/cmpn/service.feature.html > >>> [3] > https://github.com/apache/sling-whiteboard/tree/master/osgi-featuremodel > >>> [4] > >>> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r3b548064b13718350ef08d918018f0c9b175554b6c93b95c846c044d%40%3Cdev.sling.apache.org%3E > >>> > > > > > > >
