On Jun 24, 8:29 am, Chris Adamson <[email protected]> wrote: > Looking at the TSS article, I'm surprised it took over an hour for the > personal attacks to show up in the comments. I remember the OSGi > community being much quicker to anger than that. >
Yes, personal attacks are small minded, much better to generalise about a whole community. OSGi can be pretty nice, modularity and runtime dynamism are not things that Java tends to do well normally. To me it seems that the main problems for OSGi are that Java devs are used to good tools and OSGi tooling is immature; and that library/framework writers are used to using the classpath in a way that doesn't play nicely with OSGi. For OSGi to really succeed it needs a critical mass of developers embracing it. There's a lot of 3rd party code that is painful to use - the first time you hit a lirbrary that doesn't play well with OSGi the typical response is "OSGi is annoying", and not "this library writer is making assumptions about the classpath that are not always going to be true". IMO to succeed* in the long term it would really need to be part of the core java platform, and that seems pretty unlikely, esp. now with Jigsaw on the way. * At least where "success" == mainstream adoption, it is arguably already very successful in some areas. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
