On Oct 16, 2006, at 17:18 , Niclas Hedhman wrote: On 10/16/06, Peter Kriens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I agree that there are many more areas that could be standardized but
we have the issue of man power ... Developing a specification is quite
a lot of work when you want to do it right and you need at least 3
companies willing to do work. Is that so even if the RFP involves a fairly limited scope? The most immediate one that comes to my mind, and has been bothering me for quite a while; All OSGi platforms provides a Console interface, often with extensible ways to access it ( System.in, TCP, telnet, jabber) and often an extensible mechanism to add your own commands. It sounds a lot of waste to have several implementations of these, and the users will occassionally end up with several running at the same time, because some extensions are available on one and not the other. The spec for this seems to me to be fairly small, and wouldn't require man years of effort. The main problem is probably to deviate enough from all existing ones, to avoid 'cronyism'.
I think the move to actually separate the compendium from the core spec in R4 was a good one. Probably the next step would be to allow this compendium to be extended. The big question is, should such specifications all be done by OSGi or can we create some kind of "open" repository of compendium service descriptions. There are several other areas that come to mind that could benefit from more standardization, but as Peter explains, the OSGi alliance probably does not have the manpower to do all this officially.
...and if they don't, who will make sure all efforts are aligned and well thought out?
Greetings, Marcel
|
_______________________________________________
OSGi Developer Mail List
osgi-dev@bundles.osgi.org
http://bundles.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
