I'm not a member, so my vote may not be important at all (and I'm not
going to vote anyway ;)
Is there any chance that ASF will be providing another OSGi framework
implementation, next to felix? Will the bundles then be shared across
both projects, or are they 'felix' specific, in that they provide
services specific to felix and are likely not too interesting to other
frameworks/applications/servers?
the distinction should be made based on that decision. So #1, #2 and #3
are all valid.
#1 -> ASF is always going to support only one OSGi implementation
#2 -> ASF is probably going to support another OSGi implementation (in a
Galaxy far, far away) OR the provided bundles are general purpose
(commons-bundles?)
#3 -> ASF is probably going to support another OSGi implementation and
the provided bundles are Felix specific.
Just my $.02
Martijn
Richard S. Hall wrote:
I am not against renaming the packages, but it would be nice if we
could make this decision once and stick to it. We already discussed
this and agreed on the current package naming scheme. I waited to
commit source so we could start fresh...so much for that. :-)
We have two options that are only slightly different.
Option #1:
org.apache.osgi.framework
org.apache.osgi.bundle
org.apache.osgi.service
...
Option #2:
org.apache.felix
org.apache.osgi.bundle
org.apache.osgi.service
The benefit of the #1 is a single package hierarchy that relates
everything in a clear and explicit way. The benefits of #2 is shorter
package names for the framework and some branding.
Please review the mailing list archive for other arguments.
