celix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martim <marti...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Poddling status
Date Wed, 11 Jan 2012 12:32:44 GMT
I think that the c++ point is a good one. Given celix as a universal 
osgi, how language bindings enter in scene?
Other languages communities could benefit by having a osgi 
implementation. Object oriented languages tend to have a community more 
open to this kind of development (service oriented) than c community. As 
a c++ developer I would love if I could use a good osgi implementation 
with a good community support and Apache as the infrastructure provider 
in my daily work (currently we are using SOF 
(http://sof.tiddlyspot.com/), which is good but with almost zero 
support). Python, Ruby, .net world, all that could benefit too.


Em 11/01/2012 06:04, Pepijn Noltes escreveu:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Marcel Offermans
> <marcel.offermans@luminis.nl>  wrote:
>> On Jan 11, 2012, at 7:30 AM, Alexander Broekhuis wrote:
>>> On the incubator list a discussion is going on about slow/small poddlings
>>> and how to handle these. Celix is one of these poddlings.
>>> For Celix I see the following problems (at least):
>>> - No community growth (or not visible..)
>>> - No new committers
>>> - No releases made
>>> I think a plan is needed to see how we can move Celix towards graduation,
>>> how we can get a community, more committers etc.
>> Agreed. The Incubator PMC in particular is interested in learning how the community
intends to address the issues that prevent a podling from graduating. They feel that, especially
after being in the incubator for over a year, a graduation plan should be drafted.
> Concerning the Celix community growth, at Thales Netherlands we are
> currently working on a research project in which Celix plays a big
> part. We are exploring the opportunity to use Celix as a middleware
> solution - replacing our propertairy solution - in our Radar
> development. We strongly feel this is going to be a succes and are the
> moment busy developing the OSGi Device Access Specification in Celix.
> We are planning to send a patch in the coming weeks. Hopefully this
> helps in supporting Celix :)
>>> Looking at the three items, the first two will be the most difficult, and
>>> require the most attention. We have been working on visibility, going to
>>> the EclipseCon, ApacheCon and several other smaller local community events.
>> Again, I agree. While it is time to make a release as well, and this might actually
help people who want to take a look at Celix, the main issue that needs to be addressed is
the size and diversity of the community.
>> At these events you mention, no doubt you have talked directly to a bunch of people.
Could you somehow summarize their feedback?
>> What other communities can we possibly reach out to, and how?
>>> I'd like to hear what people following this list think of these problems,
>>> and how we can move towards a healthy community. What is holding you back?
>>> What is needed to be able to adopt Celix? Feel free to express any concern
>>> or opinion you have. Either technical, documentation etc.
>> One question I've been getting occasionally is: "does Celix also work with C++?".
>>  From a use case point of view, I think we could explore the scenario where you have
Java application that uses native code. Mostly, this is now done using JNI which has the downside
that it can take the whole JVM down if something goes wrong in the native code. From a robustness
point of view, this is unacceptable, and I think Celix can be used to provide a better implementation.
With this use case, we can target any Java project that uses native libraries, which in turn
might help growing our community. Such use cases are probably interesting enough to write
about on all kinds of Java sites.
> Good idea. I also think a working scenario with Celix instead of JNI
> is worth presenting to different Java user groups.
>> Greetings, Marcel
> Greetings,
> Pepijn

View raw message