You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@celix.apache.org by Alexander Broekhuis <a....@gmail.com> on 2012/01/11 07:30:53 UTC
Poddling status
Hi all,
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.
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.
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.
--
Met vriendelijke groet,
Alexander Broekhuis
Re: Poddling status
Posted by Alexander Broekhuis <a....@gmail.com>.
Hi,
>
> > You got my attention already :-) I don't know if that is feasible, but
> > having something like a one-day brainstorming meeting in real life would
> > definitely get things rolling much faster. The main developers of the
> listed
> > C++ OSGi projects are all living in Germany and the Netherlands are not
> so
> > far away. If people are interested, maybe there is an opportunity to
> meet...
>
> Good idea. I also think it would be wise not to wait to long with
> this, so maybe its possible to arrange something the first half year
> of 2012 ?
>
I agree, lets try to plan something for this. Any ideas on location/date?
We should probably start by contacting maintainers of the other frameworks.
>
> Maybe a step to far, but isn't a idea - instead of just adding a C++
> wrapper - to develop Celix as a SOA framework where C and C++
> services/bundles can be transparently combined? In other words
> services - written in C or C++ - should always expose a C and C++
> interface. This way Celix could be an interesting framework for
> projects which want combine C and C++ without resolving to extern "C"
> constructs.
>
I don't think this idea is a step to far, being able to mix c and c++
services/bundles (ie one common service type/description) would be a big
plus!
--
Met vriendelijke groet,
Alexander Broekhuis
Re: Poddling status
Posted by Pepijn Noltes <pe...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Sascha Zelzer
<s....@dkfz-heidelberg.de> wrote:
> On 01/13/2012 07:23 PM, Marcel Offermans wrote:
>>
>> On Jan 12, 2012, at 11:15 AM, Alexander Broekhuis wrote:
>>
>>> - Use Celix as an alternative for JNI, which provides a more robust
>>> solution. The processes are separated, and one side crashing won't take
>>> down the other.
>>> Does anyone have a specific use case or interest in this that can be used
>>> as a showcase?
>
>
> I don't, sorry. We do not use Java at all. However, I am still interested in
> compatibility with Java OSGi services (probably using "remote services" in
> some way).
>
>
>>>
>>> - During many discussions C++ is mentioned, also seing the replies now
>>> again there seems to be quite a lot of interest in an OSGi implementation
>>> in C++.
>>> - There are several C++ OSGi like implementations, collaboration with
>>> these
>>> projects could benefit both.
>>
>> It makes a lot of sense to reach out to those communities to see if we can
>> collaborate.
>
>
> Sounds very good to me. At the very least, the developers/communities get to
> know each other and see if they share the same visions.
>
>
>>> Seeing this interest in C++, I think it would be a good starting point to
>>> try and reach a broader community.
>>>
>>> The following C++ frameworks are mentioned:
>>> - nOSGi: http://www-vs.informatik.uni-ulm.de/proj/nosgi/
>>> - SOF: http://sof.tiddlyspot.com/
>>> - CommonTK Plugin Framework:
>>> http://www.commontk.org/index.php/Documentation/Plugin_Framework
>>
>> If anybody else has additions to this list, let us know!
>>
>> Maybe closer to home, other Apache projects that are interested in
>> collaborating. For example, we are currently using the APR and might even do
>> ports to platforms that currently are not supported yet. Another example
>> could be to look at other OSGi projects (Felix, ACE, Karaf, ...) and see if
>> there are things that could be of interest to them (I'm thinking they might
>> be interested in a JNI alternative, for example).
>>
>>> Areas where I think collaboration might be interesting are:
>>> * Bundling
>>> * Metadata
>>> * API (how to map the OSGi specification to C/C++)
>>
>> I'm sure there are many technical issues to work on, once we get in
>> contact. The first thing we should do is to see if we have common goals.
>> Since we're all implementing the OSGi specification at least at a high level
>> we do.
>
>
> I definitely agree. Having some common ground would be great. Agreeing on
> the API level sure will get very technical. Having the same Metadata format
> would definitely ease the integration step of different C++ framework a lot.
>
>
>>
>>> Does anyone have any ideas/suggestions regarding this? What would be a
>>> good
>>> starting point?
>>
>> Getting in touch, getting a discussion going. Perhaps we should write up a
>> small introduction to Celix, maybe even a short demo video, that shows what
>> Celix can do, contact these projects on their mailing lists, forums, etc.
>> and see what happens.
>
>
> You got my attention already :-) I don't know if that is feasible, but
> having something like a one-day brainstorming meeting in real life would
> definitely get things rolling much faster. The main developers of the listed
> C++ OSGi projects are all living in Germany and the Netherlands are not so
> far away. If people are interested, maybe there is an opportunity to meet...
Good idea. I also think it would be wise not to wait to long with
this, so maybe its possible to arrange something the first half year
of 2012 ?
>
>
>>
>>> Also I think it is interesting how the current Celix framework can be
>>> extended so that it can support C++. If possible I would like to keep a C
>>> only framework, with specific extensions if used with C++.
>>
>> Agreed.
>
>
> Yes, AFAIK that is exactly how other projects are doing this. The C library
> is untouched, and a separate C++ library/framework just provides a thin
> object-oriented API layer on top. Shouldn't be too hard to do. And the huge
> advantage of having a native C API is that generating other language
> wrappers is much easier.
Maybe a step to far, but isn't a idea - instead of just adding a C++
wrapper - to develop Celix as a SOA framework where C and C++
services/bundles can be transparently combined? In other words
services - written in C or C++ - should always expose a C and C++
interface. This way Celix could be an interesting framework for
projects which want combine C and C++ without resolving to extern "C"
constructs.
>
> Greetings from Heidelberg,
>
> Sascha
Re: Poddling status
Posted by Sascha Zelzer <s....@dkfz-heidelberg.de>.
On 01/13/2012 07:23 PM, Marcel Offermans wrote:
> On Jan 12, 2012, at 11:15 AM, Alexander Broekhuis wrote:
>
>> - Use Celix as an alternative for JNI, which provides a more robust
>> solution. The processes are separated, and one side crashing won't take
>> down the other.
>> Does anyone have a specific use case or interest in this that can be used
>> as a showcase?
I don't, sorry. We do not use Java at all. However, I am still
interested in compatibility with Java OSGi services (probably using
"remote services" in some way).
>>
>> - During many discussions C++ is mentioned, also seing the replies now
>> again there seems to be quite a lot of interest in an OSGi implementation
>> in C++.
>> - There are several C++ OSGi like implementations, collaboration with these
>> projects could benefit both.
> It makes a lot of sense to reach out to those communities to see if we can collaborate.
Sounds very good to me. At the very least, the developers/communities
get to know each other and see if they share the same visions.
>> Seeing this interest in C++, I think it would be a good starting point to
>> try and reach a broader community.
>>
>> The following C++ frameworks are mentioned:
>> - nOSGi: http://www-vs.informatik.uni-ulm.de/proj/nosgi/
>> - SOF: http://sof.tiddlyspot.com/
>> - CommonTK Plugin Framework:
>> http://www.commontk.org/index.php/Documentation/Plugin_Framework
> If anybody else has additions to this list, let us know!
>
> Maybe closer to home, other Apache projects that are interested in collaborating. For example, we are currently using the APR and might even do ports to platforms that currently are not supported yet. Another example could be to look at other OSGi projects (Felix, ACE, Karaf, ...) and see if there are things that could be of interest to them (I'm thinking they might be interested in a JNI alternative, for example).
>
>> Areas where I think collaboration might be interesting are:
>> * Bundling
>> * Metadata
>> * API (how to map the OSGi specification to C/C++)
> I'm sure there are many technical issues to work on, once we get in contact. The first thing we should do is to see if we have common goals. Since we're all implementing the OSGi specification at least at a high level we do.
I definitely agree. Having some common ground would be great. Agreeing
on the API level sure will get very technical. Having the same Metadata
format would definitely ease the integration step of different C++
framework a lot.
>
>> Does anyone have any ideas/suggestions regarding this? What would be a good
>> starting point?
> Getting in touch, getting a discussion going. Perhaps we should write up a small introduction to Celix, maybe even a short demo video, that shows what Celix can do, contact these projects on their mailing lists, forums, etc. and see what happens.
You got my attention already :-) I don't know if that is feasible, but
having something like a one-day brainstorming meeting in real life would
definitely get things rolling much faster. The main developers of the
listed C++ OSGi projects are all living in Germany and the Netherlands
are not so far away. If people are interested, maybe there is an
opportunity to meet...
>
>> Also I think it is interesting how the current Celix framework can be
>> extended so that it can support C++. If possible I would like to keep a C
>> only framework, with specific extensions if used with C++.
> Agreed.
Yes, AFAIK that is exactly how other projects are doing this. The C
library is untouched, and a separate C++ library/framework just provides
a thin object-oriented API layer on top. Shouldn't be too hard to do.
And the huge advantage of having a native C API is that generating other
language wrappers is much easier.
Greetings from Heidelberg,
Sascha
Re: Poddling status
Posted by Marcel Offermans <ma...@luminis.nl>.
On Jan 12, 2012, at 11:15 AM, Alexander Broekhuis wrote:
> - Use Celix as an alternative for JNI, which provides a more robust
> solution. The processes are separated, and one side crashing won't take
> down the other.
> Does anyone have a specific use case or interest in this that can be used
> as a showcase?
>
> - During many discussions C++ is mentioned, also seing the replies now
> again there seems to be quite a lot of interest in an OSGi implementation
> in C++.
> - There are several C++ OSGi like implementations, collaboration with these
> projects could benefit both.
It makes a lot of sense to reach out to those communities to see if we can collaborate.
> Seeing this interest in C++, I think it would be a good starting point to
> try and reach a broader community.
>
> The following C++ frameworks are mentioned:
> - nOSGi: http://www-vs.informatik.uni-ulm.de/proj/nosgi/
> - SOF: http://sof.tiddlyspot.com/
> - CommonTK Plugin Framework:
> http://www.commontk.org/index.php/Documentation/Plugin_Framework
If anybody else has additions to this list, let us know!
Maybe closer to home, other Apache projects that are interested in collaborating. For example, we are currently using the APR and might even do ports to platforms that currently are not supported yet. Another example could be to look at other OSGi projects (Felix, ACE, Karaf, ...) and see if there are things that could be of interest to them (I'm thinking they might be interested in a JNI alternative, for example).
> Areas where I think collaboration might be interesting are:
> * Bundling
> * Metadata
> * API (how to map the OSGi specification to C/C++)
I'm sure there are many technical issues to work on, once we get in contact. The first thing we should do is to see if we have common goals. Since we're all implementing the OSGi specification at least at a high level we do.
> Does anyone have any ideas/suggestions regarding this? What would be a good
> starting point?
Getting in touch, getting a discussion going. Perhaps we should write up a small introduction to Celix, maybe even a short demo video, that shows what Celix can do, contact these projects on their mailing lists, forums, etc. and see what happens.
> Also I think it is interesting how the current Celix framework can be
> extended so that it can support C++. If possible I would like to keep a C
> only framework, with specific extensions if used with C++.
Agreed.
Greetings, Marcel
Re: Poddling status
Posted by Marcel Offermans <ma...@luminis.nl>.
On Jan 13, 2012, at 11:24 AM, Pepijn Noltes wrote:
>> - Thales is going to use Celix in a research project and is actively
>> developing Celix and with Celix. Part of their development is an
>> implementation of the Device Access Specification, which will be donated to
>> Celix. I think this is great news!
Great news indeed, the device access specification is a great abstraction to detect devices and load a whole stack of drivers for them. Because (low level) device drivers are often written in C/C++ anyway, I think this would be a great addition to Celix.
If you need any help, procedure wise, in making this donation, let me know. We will need a Software Grant for example.
>> Pepijn: Are you willing to maintain the Device Access implementation if it
>> is donated to Celix?
>
> Yes, I am willing to maintain the Device Access implementation.
Good news again. Pepijn, were you involved in writing that implementation as well?
Greetings, Marcel
Re: Poddling status
Posted by Pepijn Noltes <pe...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Alexander Broekhuis
<a....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for the replies. I'll try to summarize what has been posted by now:
>
> - Thales is going to use Celix in a research project and is actively
> developing Celix and with Celix. Part of their development is an
> implementation of the Device Access Specification, which will be donated to
> Celix. I think this is great news!
> Pepijn: Are you willing to maintain the Device Access implementation if it
> is donated to Celix?
Yes, I am willing to maintain the Device Access implementation.
>
> - Use Celix as an alternative for JNI, which provides a more robust
> solution. The processes are separated, and one side crashing won't take
> down the other.
> Does anyone have a specific use case or interest in this that can be used
> as a showcase?
>
> - During many discussions C++ is mentioned, also seing the replies now
> again there seems to be quite a lot of interest in an OSGi implementation
> in C++.
> - There are several C++ OSGi like implementations, collaboration with these
> projects could benefit both.
>
> Seeing this interest in C++, I think it would be a good starting point to
> try and reach a broader community.
>
> The following C++ frameworks are mentioned:
> - nOSGi: http://www-vs.informatik.uni-ulm.de/proj/nosgi/
> - SOF: http://sof.tiddlyspot.com/
> - CommonTK Plugin Framework:
> http://www.commontk.org/index.php/Documentation/Plugin_Framework
>
> Areas where I think collaboration might be interesting are:
> * Bundling
> * Metadata
> * API (how to map the OSGi specification to C/C++)
>
> Does anyone have any ideas/suggestions regarding this? What would be a good
> starting point?
>
> Also I think it is interesting how the current Celix framework can be
> extended so that it can support C++. If possible I would like to keep a C
> only framework, with specific extensions if used with C++.
>
> Again, any ideas are welcome! My knowledge about C++ isn't that great, so
> any help would be appreciated.
>
> If I misunderstood or forgot something, feel free to correct me.
>
> 2012/1/11 Sascha Zelzer <s....@dkfz-heidelberg.de>
>
>> There is another project which I forgot to mention: nOSGi (
>> http://www-vs.informatik.uni-**ulm.de/proj/nosgi/<http://www-vs.informatik.uni-ulm.de/proj/nosgi/>)
>>
>> It also has a very nice paper explaining their approach. Maybe we can get
>> the devopers of all these frameworks together to share their requirements,
>> ideas, visions, etc.
>>
>> Just my two cents.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Sascha
>>
>>
>>
>> On 01/11/2012 01:41 PM, Sascha Zelzer wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am following the Celix efforts with interest, but I am also more
>>> interested in C++.
>>>
>>> In my opinion, Celix could try to reach out to other projects and their
>>> (probably small) community implementing a OSGi - like environment. If
>>> efforts could be concentrate, or some kind of interoperability be
>>> achieved, this would be awesome. Projects in my mind are Poco
>>> (commercial), SOF, and CTK.
>>>
>>> I tried to start some discussions about that a while ago, but
>>> unfortunately did not get any replies:
>>>
>>> http://incubator.markmail.org/**search/+list:org.apache.**
>>> incubator.celix-dev#query:**list%3Aorg.apache.incubator.**
>>> celix-dev%20from%3A%22Sascha%**20Zelzer%22+page:1+mid:**
>>> yrsceyy3ovisbhkh+state:results<http://incubator.markmail.org/search/+list:org.apache.incubator.celix-dev#query:list%3Aorg.apache.incubator.celix-dev%20from%3A%22Sascha%20Zelzer%22+page:1+mid:yrsceyy3ovisbhkh+state:results>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Sascha
>>>
>>> On 01/11/2012 01:32 PM, Martim wrote:
>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Martim
>>>>
>>>> Em 11/01/2012 06:04, Pepijn Noltes escreveu:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Marcel Offermans
>>>>> <ma...@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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Met vriendelijke groet,
>
> Alexander Broekhuis
Re: Poddling status
Posted by Alexander Broekhuis <a....@gmail.com>.
Hi all,
Thanks for the replies. I'll try to summarize what has been posted by now:
- Thales is going to use Celix in a research project and is actively
developing Celix and with Celix. Part of their development is an
implementation of the Device Access Specification, which will be donated to
Celix. I think this is great news!
Pepijn: Are you willing to maintain the Device Access implementation if it
is donated to Celix?
- Use Celix as an alternative for JNI, which provides a more robust
solution. The processes are separated, and one side crashing won't take
down the other.
Does anyone have a specific use case or interest in this that can be used
as a showcase?
- During many discussions C++ is mentioned, also seing the replies now
again there seems to be quite a lot of interest in an OSGi implementation
in C++.
- There are several C++ OSGi like implementations, collaboration with these
projects could benefit both.
Seeing this interest in C++, I think it would be a good starting point to
try and reach a broader community.
The following C++ frameworks are mentioned:
- nOSGi: http://www-vs.informatik.uni-ulm.de/proj/nosgi/
- SOF: http://sof.tiddlyspot.com/
- CommonTK Plugin Framework:
http://www.commontk.org/index.php/Documentation/Plugin_Framework
Areas where I think collaboration might be interesting are:
* Bundling
* Metadata
* API (how to map the OSGi specification to C/C++)
Does anyone have any ideas/suggestions regarding this? What would be a good
starting point?
Also I think it is interesting how the current Celix framework can be
extended so that it can support C++. If possible I would like to keep a C
only framework, with specific extensions if used with C++.
Again, any ideas are welcome! My knowledge about C++ isn't that great, so
any help would be appreciated.
If I misunderstood or forgot something, feel free to correct me.
2012/1/11 Sascha Zelzer <s....@dkfz-heidelberg.de>
> There is another project which I forgot to mention: nOSGi (
> http://www-vs.informatik.uni-**ulm.de/proj/nosgi/<http://www-vs.informatik.uni-ulm.de/proj/nosgi/>)
>
> It also has a very nice paper explaining their approach. Maybe we can get
> the devopers of all these frameworks together to share their requirements,
> ideas, visions, etc.
>
> Just my two cents.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sascha
>
>
>
> On 01/11/2012 01:41 PM, Sascha Zelzer wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am following the Celix efforts with interest, but I am also more
>> interested in C++.
>>
>> In my opinion, Celix could try to reach out to other projects and their
>> (probably small) community implementing a OSGi - like environment. If
>> efforts could be concentrate, or some kind of interoperability be
>> achieved, this would be awesome. Projects in my mind are Poco
>> (commercial), SOF, and CTK.
>>
>> I tried to start some discussions about that a while ago, but
>> unfortunately did not get any replies:
>>
>> http://incubator.markmail.org/**search/+list:org.apache.**
>> incubator.celix-dev#query:**list%3Aorg.apache.incubator.**
>> celix-dev%20from%3A%22Sascha%**20Zelzer%22+page:1+mid:**
>> yrsceyy3ovisbhkh+state:results<http://incubator.markmail.org/search/+list:org.apache.incubator.celix-dev#query:list%3Aorg.apache.incubator.celix-dev%20from%3A%22Sascha%20Zelzer%22+page:1+mid:yrsceyy3ovisbhkh+state:results>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Sascha
>>
>> On 01/11/2012 01:32 PM, Martim wrote:
>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Martim
>>>
>>> Em 11/01/2012 06:04, Pepijn Noltes escreveu:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Marcel Offermans
>>>> <ma...@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
>>>>
>>>
>
--
Met vriendelijke groet,
Alexander Broekhuis
Re: Poddling status
Posted by Sascha Zelzer <s....@dkfz-heidelberg.de>.
There is another project which I forgot to mention: nOSGi (
http://www-vs.informatik.uni-ulm.de/proj/nosgi/ )
It also has a very nice paper explaining their approach. Maybe we can
get the devopers of all these frameworks together to share their
requirements, ideas, visions, etc.
Just my two cents.
Thanks,
Sascha
On 01/11/2012 01:41 PM, Sascha Zelzer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am following the Celix efforts with interest, but I am also more
> interested in C++.
>
> In my opinion, Celix could try to reach out to other projects and their
> (probably small) community implementing a OSGi - like environment. If
> efforts could be concentrate, or some kind of interoperability be
> achieved, this would be awesome. Projects in my mind are Poco
> (commercial), SOF, and CTK.
>
> I tried to start some discussions about that a while ago, but
> unfortunately did not get any replies:
>
> http://incubator.markmail.org/search/+list:org.apache.incubator.celix-dev#query:list%3Aorg.apache.incubator.celix-dev%20from%3A%22Sascha%20Zelzer%22+page:1+mid:yrsceyy3ovisbhkh+state:results
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sascha
>
> On 01/11/2012 01:32 PM, Martim wrote:
>> 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.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Martim
>>
>> Em 11/01/2012 06:04, Pepijn Noltes escreveu:
>>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Marcel Offermans
>>> <ma...@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
Re: Poddling status
Posted by Sascha Zelzer <s....@dkfz-heidelberg.de>.
Hi,
I am following the Celix efforts with interest, but I am also more
interested in C++.
In my opinion, Celix could try to reach out to other projects and their
(probably small) community implementing a OSGi - like environment. If
efforts could be concentrate, or some kind of interoperability be
achieved, this would be awesome. Projects in my mind are Poco
(commercial), SOF, and CTK.
I tried to start some discussions about that a while ago, but
unfortunately did not get any replies:
http://incubator.markmail.org/search/+list:org.apache.incubator.celix-dev#query:list%3Aorg.apache.incubator.celix-dev%20from%3A%22Sascha%20Zelzer%22+page:1+mid:yrsceyy3ovisbhkh+state:results
Thanks,
Sascha
On 01/11/2012 01:32 PM, Martim wrote:
> 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.
>
> Thanks,
> Martim
>
> Em 11/01/2012 06:04, Pepijn Noltes escreveu:
>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Marcel Offermans
>> <ma...@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
Re: Poddling status
Posted by Martim <ma...@gmail.com>.
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.
Thanks,
Martim
Em 11/01/2012 06:04, Pepijn Noltes escreveu:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Marcel Offermans
> <ma...@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
Re: Poddling status
Posted by Pepijn Noltes <pe...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Marcel Offermans
<ma...@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
Re: Poddling status
Posted by Marcel Offermans <ma...@luminis.nl>.
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.
> 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.
Greetings, Marcel