As I expected. Nor is it required that the reference impl. be in the org.osgi namespace I gather.
I think it would have been/be beneficial if all the reference implementations were named org.osgi.whatever and that there was a repo under osgi.org that contained them all. Not complaining, just something I thought about recently that I think it may have simplified things a bit and helped grease the wheels of adoption so to speak. Regards, Scott From: Tim Ward <tim.w...@paremus.com> Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2020 12:11 PM To: Leschke, Scott <slesc...@medline.com>; OSGi Developer Mail List <osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org> Subject: Re: [osgi-dev] Compendium services Yes, it’s a requirement of the OSGi specification process that there be a reference implementation and test suite for every specification chapter. Note that the reference implementation may not always be open source (although it is very rare that it isn’t) and isn’t guaranteed to be particularly fast or scalable. It will, however, definitely pass the compliance tests. Sent from my iPhone On 14 Aug 2020, at 23:14, Leschke, Scott via osgi-dev <osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org<mailto:osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org>> wrote: I’m thinking this must be yes but do all compendium services have a reference implementation? Scott _______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org<mailto:osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org> https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev__;!!PoMpmxQzTok3!uR47BDK8MNhT0PUHfSNkDdHRT55wwa1-L4oiU8lE7us7PYglPGmcfsu1DjuElgE$>
_______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev