Hello Felix, thank you very much for your quick reply! This helps me a lot!
Regards Jens On 04.04.2010, at 09:52, Felix Meschberger wrote: > Hi, > > On 03.04.2010 15:42, Jens Lauterbach wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I am new to the OSGi and Java world. At the moment I am working on a paper >> in which I want to compare how far Felix, Equinox and Knopflerfish are >> implementing the new OSGi 4.2 specification. >> >> Sadly, I couldn't find a lot informaton about that on the Felix homepage. >> >> The "Framework" subproject seems to implement the whole Core specification. >> Is that correct? Or are there parts of the Core specs that are not >> implemented yet? >> >> To be more precise I mean: >> >> - Security Layer >> - Module Layer >> - Life Cycle Layer >> - Service Layer >> - Framework API >> - Package Admin Service >> - Start Level Service >> - Conditional Permission Admin Service >> - URL Handlers Service >> - Service Hooks > > AFAICT the latest release of the framework implements the full 4.2 core > specification. Richard Hall and/or Karl Pauls may know better. > >> >> And how about the Compendium Specs? How much of these specs are covered by >> Felix? >> On some of the parts of the Compendium spec (see below) I could find a >> subproject. For instance the "Log Service" is implemented by the "Log" >> subproject. >> >> - Remote Services > > We don't have this implementation. But IIRC Apache CXF has an > implementation which happens to be the OSGi reference implementation. > >> - Log Service > > Multiple implementations exists. We have a simple one based on Log4J > (based on the one provided by the OPS4J project). The Apache Sling > project has another one. > >> - Http Service > > We have two implementations. Both implement the R4.2 compendium > specification but not the recently released R4.2 enterprise > specification extensions. > > Maybe Apache Aries is working on an implementation of the enterprise > extensions. > >> - Device Access > > Don't know myself. > >> - Configuration Admin Service > > Yes and our implementation happens to be the OSGi reference implementation. > >> - Metatype Service > > Yes. > >> - Preferences Service > > I think, yes. > >> - User Admin Service > > We have an implementation, but I don't know about the specification > compliance. > >> - Wire Admin Service > > Don't know myself. > >> - Initial Provisioning > > I don't think so. > >> - UPnP Device Service > > We have an implementation, but I don't know about the specification > compliance. > > In addition we have a new Web Console plugin supporting UPNP. > >> - Declarative Services > > Yes. > >> - Event Admin Service > > Yes. > >> - Deployment Admin > > Yes, though it is not entirely complete. IIRC it lacks deinstallation > functionality. > >> - Auto Configuration > > IIRC, yes. > >> - Application Admin > > Not here, maybe Apache Aries is working on something. > >> - DMT Admin Service > > AFAICT not here. > >> - Monitor Admin Service > > AFAICT not here. > >> - Foreign Application Access > > Not here, maybe Apache Aries is working on something. > >> - Blueprint Container > > See Apache Aries. > >> - Tracker > > Yes > >> - XML Parser Service > > AFAICT no. > >> - Position > > AFAICT no. > >> - Measurement and State > > AFAICT no. > >> - Execution Environment > > AFAICT we have partial support. Maybe Richard Hall knows more about this. > >> >> I hope you can help me since I can't find any information about that >> anywhere. > > Hope this helps. > > Regards > Felix > >> >> With best regards >> Jens >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
