Hi there,
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 5:18 AM, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "We who are not Eclipse fanatics should work more together and not dilute our > resources." +1, beside that, most people know each other so we are already working alongside each other, regardless of the community we are committing most to. > My main concern revolves around the community model, which is dictated by the > Apache Software Foundation to be a meritocracy for Felix, and a "No Barrier" > approach here. Now, I think it was Richard who suggested that perhaps Pax > should be the sandbox of Felix, for quick and open collaboration outside the > current committership. In principle I think this is Ok, although this adds > some paperwork overhead (called Software Grant) when importing the codebase > to Felix. My interpretation of this would then mean that codebases not > directly relevant to the specification suites, present or future Mmh if we add the paperwork to be "upstream compliant" with Apache, would that even add some at least theoretical benefit when it comes to legal help etc, strengthening the position of the copyright holders even before the code enters the ASF, if it ever does? > > The other suggestion (which I think was from Karl), was that Pax would > re-brand selected Felix stuff, which is confirmed inter-operable on other > platforms. Would be great since there is a number of stuff that could benefit from greater even occasional care :) > Apache Felix is a community strongly committed to the OSGi specification > suites and intend to build fully compliant implementations of these > specifications, current and future. +1 > > The Pax community is strongly committed to OSGi framework independency, > interoperability and open participation. +1 > > > > Now, to get more concrete, I would like to propose the following action plan; > > 1) Pax Logging and Pax Web codebases are moved to Apache Felix and becomes > the > Felix implementation of these Compendium Specs. The primary developers of > these will become (if not already is) Felix committers. > > 2) Pax Logging and Pax Web remains "Pax" branded, and will continue to be > released out of the Pax project, possibly not in sync with the releases > from the Felix project, as ASF release rules are more rigid and hence > slow. > > 3) Pax Web Extender & Co stays in the Pax project, at least for now. If there > is specs heading in that direction, we can bring this up again. > > 4) An open invitation to all Felix and other OSGi developers to join the Pax > project at OPS4J. OPS4J is a "No Barrier" community, what we call "Wiki > brought to Coding". OSGi stuff that are not related to either the current > specification or ambitions to become specifications are probably better > served at Pax. > > 5) Pax will continue to encourage experimenation, and people interested in > OSGi will do themselves a favour of doing the experiments at Pax, as > Felix PMC will consider Pax community members for committer status at > Felix. > > 6) Felix "configadmin" and "fileinstall" are "imported" into the Pax ConfMan > suite. Work will start to ensure the interop and full spec compliance. > Others may follow as people have itches. > > 7) Felix and Pax will cross-reference each other on their websites. Sounds like a good distribution of work and responsibility, adding more traction to both communities without hindering the participation from other sources and thus optimizing the overall outcome for OSGi and the developers involved. > > > Well, this is a proposal, mostly to the Pax community (Felix community is > CC'ed) and not written in stone. What do you all think? > IMHO, some projects at Felix should probably be moved over to Pax, to > encourage more participation from others. I leave it as an encouragement to > those who work on such candidates to bring this up themselves. I think that is a great starter from both sides. If this gets successful, there might even be pattern there in aligning early ideas, wild experiments etc with OPS as a form to foster them and then take "serious" development into a bit more rigid model like the ASF. I am not sure this is an accurate description but let's see what effects we can see of trying closer collaboration between Pax and Felix! /peter -- GTalk: neubauer.peter Skype peter.neubauer ICQ 18762544 GTalk neubauer.peter Phone +46704 106975 LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/neubauer http://www.neo4j.org - New Energy for Data - the Netbase. http://www.ops4j.org - New Energy for OSS Communities - Open Participation Software. http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java - Domain Driven Development.
