> Unfortunately most frameworks export the tracker package directly, > rather than from a separate bundle, despite it not being part of thecore spec.
It _is_ part of the Core R5 spec. > > BJ, what's to stop a framework providing an optimised ServiceTracker > implementation? Nothing. It is AL2 licensed code. The changed impl would need to pass the OSGi CT to call itself compliant with the spec though. > The tracker package is very odd in that OSGi > directly provides the implementation rather than just specifying behaviour... We have a number of util packages in the spec with implementation. In particular the tracker implementation is rather complex and hard to get correct, so OSGi had an interest in making sure a correct implementation was always available. This is all a very interesting conversation but other than some artificial micro benchmarks, there is no evidence of a performance problem in normal real world use. And besides, people should be using DS anyway! :-) -- BJ Hargrave Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM OSGi Fellow and CTO of the OSGi Alliance [email protected] office: +1 386 848 1781 mobile: +1 386 848 3788
_______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List [email protected] https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
