IMO if including the osgi metadata in the jars won't break anything
else we should put it in right away. It doesn't need to work
completely or even partially. I think that one of the benefits of
the osgi effort even for non-osgi uses is that it encourages cleaner
division of responsibility between jars and again IMO anything that
makes problems in this area visible even if they don't get fixed
immediately is a good thing.
I would not support forcing anyone to change their coding style for
public/private method access, use of getter/setters etc in order to
use OSGI. I do think that generating classloading metadata is a good
thing.
thanks
david jencks
On Feb 10, 2007, at 9:47 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
John E. Conlon a écrit :
Hi Alex,
Thanks for the comments. See inline for responses.
Alex Karasulu wrote:
Doing this means committing to OSGi and I'm not going to be too
comfortable with doing this until I see:
We can look at this two ways. From one perspective we would not
be committing 'fully' to OSGi, as the decorated metadata would not
affect the behavior of the jars as they operate today.
One of the big issues for the OSGi community today is to convince
library providers to add a few lines of metadata to their jars
artifacts so they could also be used in OSGi projects. So from
this perspective I guess I am trying to convince us to 'at least'
to make our jars OSGi friendly.
...
Hi John, Alex,
First of all, I have to say that OSGi effort is valuable, and we
have to thank you, John, for you dedication and continuous effort
regarding it during those last months.
I want to address some of Alex concerns, and also give you my
opinion on the next few steps, and months. During last Apache
Conference, we have announced the first release of Apache Directory
Server (1.0) and Mina has become a TLP, separated from Directory.
We also included three sub-projects into Apache DS :
- triplesec,
- mitosis,
- ldap studio
This was a lot of work, and a lot of little things to manage (and
you know that it takes more time to manage many little things that
one big thing).
We are currently preparing a 1.0.1 release of ADS (a bug fix),
quickly followed by a 1.5.0 release, with a new Schema Management
feature (plus Java 5 support). We also have to make Mitosis stable
for may (or even better, before may !). The site has been totally
redesigned - thanks to Ersin, pam and many contributors-, and the
documentation has been improved - thanks to Stefan and Christine -.
Again, this was a lot of work.
As Alex stated, I think this time for dust to settle a little bit.
We have a damn loaded roadmap since ApacheCon EU (may 1st), and I'm
not sure we may dedicate enough attention to OSGification of ADS
before this date.
What I would suggest is that we should put this OSGification on the
roadmap starting on may, 4th, when we will be able to back it. This
is really true that if you don't get committers attention, then it
will be hard time (many complaints to be expected ...).
I'm sorry to admit that I didn't had a minute to follow up your
work, and I didn't had time to read anything about OSGi during last
year. My bad... I really want to jump into it, as I think it will
help us on many aspect.
So, can't we wait 3 more months before we jump into OSGi for ADS?
If you feel being ready, and that we should at least fulfill some
first steps that won't harm the project, then I will be pleased to
follow your instructions (like adding meta-info into the jars), but
you will have to be very explicit about what we must do, because we
will be like babies doing our first steps : keep the way really
clear of any bump and traps :)
I don't want to slow you down, I just want to express my concern to
be unable to dedicate enough time for this task in the next few
months. And I guess this is also a concern for many others ADS
committers...
It's just that, well, I feel like having run a marathon, and having
to run another one right now...
Hopefully, I'll be off for two weeks, so I will be in better shape
when I'll be back ;)
Emmanuel
