Gang, is there consensus on this approach. Would like to hear from active users of Pax Logging and Pax Web, as these are the first two candidates.
* Pax Logging to be contributed to Apache Felix, and our community will rebrand "Felix Advanced LOg Service" back to Pax Logging, both for continuation as well as interoperability ensurances. * Pax Web to be contributed to Apache Felix, and our community will rebrand "Felix Advanced Http Service" back to Pax Web and continue being the platform for advanced features such as Pax Web Extender & Co. Again interoperability will be key. If this is indeed what this community want, I will approach the Felix PMC for the practicalities, such as IP Clearance and committership status for key individuals. WDYT? Cheers Niclas On Monday 14 April 2008 11:18, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > Gang, > > I have been at the ApacheCon EU in Amsterdam, and had an interesting talk > with Richard Hall, Karl Pauls and Marcel Offermanns of the Felix project > (which I and Stuart both are committers as well). > > Now, the "Criticial Path" (so to speak) of these talks was something like; > > "We who are not Eclipse fanatics should work more together and not dilute > our resources." > > Now, the present Felix community thought it was probably still a good idea > to keep Pax as a neutral ground, where inter-operability is the main > concern. But they also feel that Felix should have a complete set of > bundles for the entire specification suite, incl the compendium. > > 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 > > 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. > > Many other smaller items were also discussed. > > So, we (at the table) more or less agreed to the following definitions; > > 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. > > The Pax community is strongly committed to OSGi framework independency, > interoperability and open participation. > > > > 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. > > > 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. > > > Cheers -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug _______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
