Hi all And we should also mention that quite a number of active community members actually working on those things are members (or employees of members) of the OSGi alliance and as such open to feedback received from the communities on the evolution of the specifications.
As such, I think it is even positive for both the communities and the OSGi alliance to have Apache projects implement reference implementations. Maybe we could do a better job in communicating that fact ? Regards Felix > Am 18.01.2017 um 11:59 schrieb David Bosschaert <david.bosscha...@gmail.com>: > > Hi Guillaume, > > First of all, the OSGi Alliance is a very open standards development > organization. Any organisation can join. RFPs and RFCs are developed in the > open, specs are available for free and are free to be implemented by anyone. > > There is also an open feedback channel available where everyone can post > feedback, described at https://github.com/osgi/design > > OSGi works very hard in defining specs that are portable and can be > implemented without the need to pay for any licenses or anything of that > sort. > > History has shown that spec implementations are really quite portable. > Implementation bundles can be mixed from different sources and everything > just works as long as you use the specced APIs. > > Every new spec that is being worked on in OSGi needs, besides the RFP/RFC > and spec chapter, a Reference Implementation and a Conformance Testsuite. > Over the past 10 years or so, Reference Implementations have primarily been > implemented in open source. This has the benefit that everyone can see what > the implementation is going to be and also it allows everyone to provide > feedback and participate in the implementation. Apache committers have free > access to the relevant CTs as well. > > I think this is all goodness. Or would you rather see that Reference > Implementations are implemented in private? > > Best regards, > > David > > > On 18 January 2017 at 10:41, Guillaume Nodet <gno...@apache.org> wrote: > >> I'm a bit concerned by some subprojects in our communities. >> >> The ASF is supposed to be "community over code", so the very basic thing >> for a project is that people can get involved. >> >> However, I see more and more code developped as a reference implementation >> of a spec which is not publicly available, because it's still being >> developed at the OSGi Alliance. I find that very disturbing because >> there's no way the community can get involved unless they are OSGi Alliance >> members, and that's clearly not acceptable imho. >> >> Thoughts ? >> Guillaume Nodet >>
