Hi Per-Erik, You might want to have a look at the Subsystems spec, Chapter 134 in OSGi Enterprise R5. It covers some of the provisioning areas, although I'm not sure how much overlap there is with the Felix OBR provisioning features. There are a number of Subsystem implementations in the works, both in Apache and Eclipse, and possibly elsewhere.
Best regards, David On 18 April 2012 16:44, Richard S. Hall <[email protected]> wrote: > On 4/18/12 11:16 , Per-Erik Svensson wrote: >> >> Hi and thank you, >> >> What I take from this is that there will never be a fully standardized way >> of doing what Felix OBR does (or at least not in a foreseeble future) so I >> don't have to "feel bad" in picking a specific implementation. Part of my >> concern was picking an implementation only to find out that there is a >> standard way of doing the same thing in the pipeline of spec-writers. > > > Yes, there currently isn't a standard way in the pipeline, but never say > never. > > -> richard > > >> >> Thanks for the responses! >> >> Best regards, >> Per-Erik Svensson >> >> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Richard S. >> Hall<[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> On 4/18/12 08:12 , Neil Bartlett wrote: >>> >>>> I assume you're talking about the new Resolver and Repository >>>> specifications that are in the OSGi Enterprise R5 release? Because "OBR" >>>> is >>>> properly the name for the Felix implementation, which has been available >>>> and released for several years. >>>> >>>> An early draft release of the Enterprise R5 spec was made publicly >>>> available in March and can be downloaded now from the OSGi site. The >>>> official final release of these specs will be some time later, depending >>>> on >>>> votes and lawyers etc, however the technical content is very unlikely to >>>> change. >>>> >>>> I believe that the Felix org.apache.felix.**bundlerepository >>>> implementation will NOT be updated to comply with the new R5 specs. >>>> Richard >>>> is working on the RI for the R5 spec within Felix but it is new code, >>>> based >>>> on the resolver in the core Felix framework. >>>> >>> I would like to see the Felix OBR implementation evolve to use the new R5 >>> resolver and repository specs, for sure. >>> >>> Per-Erik, your confusion is likely due to the fact that the scope of >>> RFC-112 has changed over the course of its lifetime. Originally, it was >>> an >>> API that was the precise basis for the Felix OBR implementation. Over >>> time, >>> some holes were discovered in the API and Felix OBR evolved into having >>> its >>> own API and well as supporting the original RFC-112. >>> >>> During the spec process for RFC-112, it became clear that the scope was >>> too big (and there were too many bike shed issues) to complete it in a >>> reasonable amount of time, so the scope was pared back (even then it >>> still >>> took a long time to complete). So, originally, RFC-112 dealt with >>> repositories, resolving, and deployment/provisioning, but now it only >>> deals >>> with repositories and resolving. Further, there is no direct relationship >>> between the repositories and resolving. >>> >>> In short, it became more low-level and only provides some of the building >>> blocks necessary to implement something like Felix OBR. So, yes, I'd like >>> to see Felix OBR built on top of these new building blocks, but in the >>> end >>> it will still require that you tie yourself to a specific implementation >>> to >>> get the full features of the current Felix OBR. >>> >>> -> richard >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> Regards >>>> Neil >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wednesday, 18 April 2012 at 13:01, Per-Erik Svensson wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Is there any timeframe on the release of OBR (the api, not the felix >>>>> implementation). I know this might not be the right place to ask but... >>>>> I >>>>> figured that people like Richard, Peter or Neil would be able to answer >>>>> and >>>>> I know they subscribe. :) >>>>> >>>>> The reason I ask is because I'm thinking of using the Felix >>>>> implementation >>>>> of the API (org.apache.felix.**bundlerepository) but before commiting >>>>> to this >>>>> I would like to know if that implementation is supposed to be fully >>>>> compliant with the spec and if the spec will ever get released. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> Per-Erik Svensson >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>> users-unsubscribe@felix.**apache.org<[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]
