incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Bosschaert <>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Celix to enter the Incubator
Date Tue, 05 Oct 2010 06:58:20 GMT
Small correction: Universal OSGi is an RFP, not a whitepaper. In fact,
it's RFP 89.
I'm currently working to see if I can distribute this RFP to a wider audience.

Best regards,


On 4 October 2010 23:36, Marcel Offermans <> wrote:
> On 24 Sep 2010, at 17:28 , Marcel Offermans wrote:
>> On 24 Sep 2010, at 17:21 , Richard S. Hall wrote:
>>> I think this is interesting. However, I'd like to point out that you may need
to take care in how you position this. I believe the OSGi specs allow for compliant open source
implementations, but it is unlikely this implementation will ever be fully compliant. So,
you'd probably be best to just position it as a C-based module system that provides OSGi interoperability.
>> Good point. I will get in touch with the OSGi Alliance to check with them how we
should call this, but I'm fine rephrasing it according to your suggestion. In any case I will
report back to the list when I get a response from them.
> Following up on this, I talked to Peter Kriens of the OSGi Alliance at last week's OSGi
Community Event and his response was that it's basically not allowed to use OSGi in the name
of a project if it's the first word of a title, but otherwise he did not see any problems
here. In fact, there was talk during that event about maybe even extending the specification
to allow implementations in other languages. In the past, there has been some talk about this
which resulted in a whitepaper called "Universal OSGi". In other words, as far as I can see
this is not going to be a problem.
> Greetings, Marcel
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message