On 10/17/06, Peter Kriens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I beg to differ. Assumptions about European cost levels and wealthy rather than passionate companies are not necessary fair. However, that is the perogative of the OSGi Alliance to assume, irregardless of fairness and accuracy.
One analogy could be that it is equally not a small task to develop a working OSGi platform, but yet we see Richard Hall accomplishing that mostly on his own. Would someone like that fork out an additional 20,000, if there was a fee associated with developing it? I doubt it, yet it dwarves in the total man-hours spent on the project. Go figure.
If you are serious about a standard, the 20K can not be the main problem.
You should realize that the 20k is dwarfed by the cost to provide the
travel and time for your employees to write the actual specifications.
I beg to differ. Assumptions about European cost levels and wealthy rather than passionate companies are not necessary fair. However, that is the perogative of the OSGi Alliance to assume, irregardless of fairness and accuracy.
One analogy could be that it is equally not a small task to develop a working OSGi platform, but yet we see Richard Hall accomplishing that mostly on his own. Would someone like that fork out an additional 20,000, if there was a fee associated with developing it? I doubt it, yet it dwarves in the total man-hours spent on the project. Go figure.
Now, back to Marcel's question; How does the Alliance plan to deal with less central specifications/standards, which the Alliance doesn't consider critical and would not be developed due to lack of "man power" and "company weight"??
Cheers
Niclas
_______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List osgi-dev@bundles.osgi.org http://bundles.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
