I think the service model with DI is significantly less complex to use than the
factory [builder] models we see in general Java ... But we do have a
commitment problem in our industry :-)
Kind regards,
Peter Kriens
On 31 jul. 2013, at 18:52, Andrei Pozolotin wrote:
> very funny link, yes. but also argument against osgi?
>
> UXCTBFFFOSGI R-5.0 :-)
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: web starter-kit: osgi + vert.x?
> From: Peter Kriens <[email protected]>
> To: Andrei Pozolotin <[email protected]>
> Cc: OSGi Developer Mail List <[email protected]>
> Date: Wed 31 Jul 2013 02:33:31 AM CDT
>> I think vert.x is only a part of the whole picture. I think what is needed
>> are more hard choices, one of the big problems in Java is that everything is
>> flexible (http://discuss.joelonsoftware.com/?joel.3.219431.12).
>>
>> And at first sight vert.x seems to have a lot of overlap with OSGi. I
>> believe OSGi can make a lot of things a lot simpler than without OSGi if you
>> go with the flow. I think vert.x is too much of a framework that was not
>> specifically developed for OSGi to actually really leverage OSGi.
>>
>> That said, did not look deep and it does look interesting. Thanks, kind
>> regards,
>>
>> Peter Kriens
>>
>> On 30 jul. 2013, at 19:20, Andrei Pozolotin wrote:
>>
>>> Peter:
>>>
>>> here you stated the you want starter web kit
>>> http://blog.osgi.org/2013/06/i-am-back.html
>>>
>>> I am curious if osgi + vert.x fits the bill?
>>> http://underlap.blogspot.com/2012/06/osgi-case-study-modular-vertx.html
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>>
>>> Andrei
>>>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
OSGi Developer Mail List
[email protected]
https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
