Forgot to add the link: <https://www.osgi.org/about-us/members/>. Lots of people involved.
On 10 July 2017 at 17:19, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: > OSGi's biggest contributors are Adobe, Bosch, Deutsche Telekom, Huawei, > IBM, Liferay, NTT, Oracle (surprisingly), Paremus, and Software AG, though > OSGi is a consortium, so similar to Java, it has a ton of other companies > and organizations involved in various components. OSGi has its roots in > embedded Java software and has only really recently gained traction in > server software (like within the past few years; OSGi is almost as old as > Java). > > On 10 July 2017 at 17:05, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > On Jul 10, 2017, at 2:58 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> On Jul 10, 2017 14:40, "Matt Sicker" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> 1. The stack is walked every time the LoggerContext has to be >> determined >> >> dynamically. This would be a really shitty tradeoff to remove. >> >> 2. I personally care more about supporting standard Java than Google's >> >> bastardization, so I'm more in support of the replaceable jar. It also >> >> provides a way to give a trimmed down version of log4j much more >> easily for >> >> Android use considering I doubt any Android apps are logging to a >> database >> >> for example. >> >> >> >> >> > On the op-ed side of things, I see Oracle has having really messed >> things >> > up with Java 9. I know backward compat is important (but not too much in >> > this case) but what kind of hack is it to put class files in the >> MANIFEST >> > folder. Gross. What that the only way to do multi-release jars? >> > >> >> They aren’t in the MANIFEST folder because there isn’t one. It is >> underneath META-INF. I am sure they did it this way because NO existing >> tools should be looking for classes there. Unbelievably, both OSGi and >> Android do. I can’t figure out what this says about Google, Oracle and >> whoever leads OSGi. >> >> I can’t say I agree with everything that has been done in Java. The fact >> that module-info files have a .java extension and are compiled into .class >> files seems ridiculous to me. But we are way beyond the point where we have >> any influence to change things, if we ever did. So we have to live with it >> and move on. >> >> Ralph >> >> >> > > > -- > Matt Sicker <[email protected]> > -- Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
