So, bottom line, from my last post, I agree and would encourage this conversation in spades.
MG On Feb 12, 2011, at 5:10 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 8:41 PM, Mike McGrady > <mmcgr...@topiatechnology.com> wrote: >> Isn't OSGi now distributed? See Fuse 4.0. > > OSGi has a specification for remote services and how to express > capabilities vs requirements, but the actual transport as such is left > out, and it hooks into new APIs that the framework has to expose to > intercept lookup and registration of services. > Do, yes, what I mention is part of the OSGi scope, but since the River > community has decided to not work together with OSGi (I think I > brought that up first time in 2006 or so), similar functionality > should be part of Jini. Java is no longer a "single platform", as it > was in 1999 when Jini came about. > Byte codes is another example of 'service proxy selection' constraints > that come to mind. Native code could be another. Security permissions > should probably also be 'advertised' in advanced. I think all this > need to be speced out, for River to become interoperable, as Jini once > promised. > > So, I think the actual problem is not that it can't be done, or that > people are not doing it, but Jini's failure initially (IMHO) was the > lack of interoperbility enablers, that there were no standards on > top. People spoke of "there could be a Printer interface" but no one > said "This is the base Printer interface, and extensions to it is made > in this way...". > And one starting point is the "environment", the first stepping stone > of requirements vs capabilities matching... > > > Cheers > -- > Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer > http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java > > I live here; http://tinyurl.com/3xugrbk > I work here; http://tinyurl.com/24svnvk > I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug Michael McGrady Chief Architect Topia Technology, Inc. Cel 1.253.720.3365 Work 1.253.572.9712 extension 2037 mmcgr...@topiatechnology.com
