Ken, As you mention, the Equinox team is busy doing a bunch of provisioning work (p2). While we are currently focused on understanding the function, our hope is that at some point we will be able to participate in the OSGi spec process and investigate issues such as OBR and MEG interaction.
On the pragmatic side, one should be able to have p2 consume OBR and MEG artifacts/metadata and install bundles. Of course that's not implemented yet but on the surface seems relatively easy to do. Jeff Ken Gilmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12/05/2007 03:12 PM Please respond to OSGi Developer Mail List <[email protected]> To Peter Kriens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc OSGi Developer Mail List <[email protected]> Subject Re: [osgi-dev] RFC 112 Bundle Repository Questions Hi Peter, Ok thanks, makes sense. I guess my main concern is that the RFC changes and breaks my implementation, but it seems the draft state is not due to frequent changes. I'll proceed with my investigation. It's unfortunate that the Eclipse provisioning work didn't cause some happy changes for the state of OBR... And thanks for the tip regarding Bundle-License. cheers ken On Dec 5, 2007, at 12:23 PM, Peter Kriens wrote: > The infancy is related to both the RFC 112 and even more to the > current implementation. There is no plan to finalize it at this moment > in time. > > Personally, I think OBR is one of the biggest missing pieces in the > OSGi story. However, I am a one man company that has too many > different things on its plate :-( and I seem to be not capable of > getting the commercial companies interested to work on this or fund > work on this. I guess another tragedy of the commons case. We all like > to have it, but nobody is willing to fund it. > > As far as I know there is nothing specific R3 in it, but you will find > it out by trying :-) > > About licensing, there is currently in the OSGi een RFC > (implementation) about a Bundle-License header that should address > some > of your needs. > > Kind regards, > > Peter Kriens > > > > > > > > > > KG> > > KG> Hello Everybody :) > > KG> We're looking at using an existing bundle repository or > KG> implementing our own. The spec itself, in the spirit of all OSGi > KG> specs, is very nicely done. The statement "The current repository > KG> is still in its infancy." refers to the repository instance hosted > KG> at www2.osgi.org or the specification itself? If it is the latter > KG> then is there an expected date of finalization? The header page > KG> for the spec defines it as "Draft"... The last edit appears to be > KG> two years ago. Also, we use Concierge. Are there any R3 gotchas > KG> to be aware of if we are to implement a Repository Admin? > KG> Finally as a suggestion it would be helpful to include a License > KG> header as a required field for bundle metadata. In looking > KG> through implementations of repositories > KG> (ex http://www2.osgi.org/Repository/HomePage? > cmd=inspect&id=org.knopflerfish.bundle.bundlerepository/2.0.0) > KG> it is not clear initially how bundles are licensed. > > KG> Thanks! > KG> ken > > > KG> > > -- > Peter Kriens Tel +33467542167 > 9C, Avenue St. Drézéry AOL,Yahoo: pkriens > 34160 Beaulieu, France ICQ 255570717 > Skype pkriens Fax +1 8153772599 > _______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List [email protected] http://www2.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
_______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List [email protected] http://www2.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
