You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@avalon.apache.org by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@apache.org> on 2003/12/01 19:07:58 UTC
[FYI] Eclipse moving to OSGi
Hi all,
I just found that Eclipse is moving their component container to OSGi
[1]. Avalon was one of the possible candidates, but it seems that only
OSGi was seriously considered [2].
OSGi was up to now mostly used in embedded systems (cars, automation),
and its adoption by the Eclipse team will promote this platform to many
more developpers, particularly in the J2EE world. I'm wondering [3] how
this can impact the future of Avalon.
What do you think?
Sylvain
[1]
http://dev.eclipse.org/viewcvs/indextech.cgi/~checkout~/equinox-home/alternateRuntimes/adoption.html
[2]
http://dev.eclipse.org/viewcvs/indextech.cgi/~checkout~/equinox-home/alternateRuntimes/comparison.html
[3] http://www.anyware-tech.com/blogs/sylvain/archives/000083.html
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: [FYI] Eclipse moving to OSGi
Posted by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@apache.org>.
Berin Loritsch wrote:
> Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I just found that Eclipse is moving their component container to OSGi
>> [1]. Avalon was one of the possible candidates, but it seems that
>> only OSGi was seriously considered [2].
>>
>> OSGi was up to now mostly used in embedded systems (cars,
>> automation), and its adoption by the Eclipse team will promote this
>> platform to many more developpers, particularly in the J2EE world.
>> I'm wondering [3] how this can impact the future of Avalon.
>>
>> What do you think?
>
>
> My initial look at OSGi is that it is solving a different set of
> problems than Avalon. Although with some of the work being done on
> the Avalon repository, that may be different now.
>
> My perception was that OSGi was working with the JAR==component
> outlook, and had some nice features for loading and unloading these
> JARs. Avalon OTOH, was working with smaller granularity components.
> So, in one sense, they can work together. In fact, it might be a good
> marriage.
And OSGi "bundle" (that's the term for the deployment unit) can provide
several services: a "BundleActivator" class inside the bundle registers
the provided services (there can be several) when the bundle is loaded.
Registering a service consists in registering an instance of the service
interface with additionnal properties that describe the service. The
lookup mechanism then allows to select a particular implementation of
the service depending on property values, by using a simple LDAP-like
query language.
OSGi is also very good a loading/downloading/unloading bundles.
I have the impression OSGi directly compares to Phoenix blocks (don't
know about Merlin?), but it doesn't support non-singleton services like
ECM or Fortress.
You can have a quick look at how it works through the very explanatory
tutorial at http://oscar-osgi.sourceforge.net/tutorial/index.html
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: [FYI] Eclipse moving to OSGi
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Tuesday 02 December 2003 05:51, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> Niclas Hedhman wrote:
>
> <snip/>
>
> >Whether we should consider "compliance" to the OSGi spec or not, is open
> > for further discussion, but I am personally a bit in favour, at least
> > right now.
>
> What do you mean by "compliance"? OSGi brings not only concepts, but a
> full API that obviously differs from Avalon's one. Or do you mean that
> an Avalon container could be implemented on top of OSGi?
My direct thought was an OSGi spec'd container, capable of housing OSGi
Bundles.
Other scenarios, as you rightlfully points out, exists :o) and was more than
I initially was thinking of.
1) A OSGi container, capable of managing OSGi bundles and Avalon components.
2) Supporting OSGi bundle of a Avalon container and its components.
3) Supporting OSGi implementations as Avalon components.
4) ?
Niclas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: [FYI] Eclipse moving to OSGi
Posted by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@apache.org>.
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
<snip/>
>Whether we should consider "compliance" to the OSGi spec or not, is open for further discussion, but I am personally a bit in favour, at least right now.
>
>
What do you mean by "compliance"? OSGi brings not only concepts, but a
full API that obviously differs from Avalon's one. Or do you mean that
an Avalon container could be implemented on top of OSGi?
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: [FYI] Eclipse moving to OSGi
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Tuesday 02 December 2003 02:19, Berin Loritsch wrote:
> My perception was that OSGi was working with the JAR==component outlook,
> and had some nice features for loading and unloading these JARs. Avalon
> OTOH, was working with smaller granularity components. So, in one sense,
> they can work together. In fact, it might be a good marriage.
My main impression from looking at OSGi a few years (2?) back was that it was
"not present" friendly.
It changes the whole JavaBean event model so that there is a kind of "Topic"
one can either consume event from or produce event to. Either consumer or
producer creates the "Topic" (I'm sure that they have some nice name about
it).
It also have a stronger separation of bundles than Merlin's containers, as
they can be loaded/unloaded without effect, a bit similar to Phoenix's SARs.
Then the final piece I remember was a couple of core services, related to
online presence, security and "revenue generating apps".
Whether we should consider "compliance" to the OSGi spec or not, is open for
further discussion, but I am personally a bit in favour, at least right now.
Niclas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: [FYI] Eclipse moving to OSGi
Posted by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>.
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I just found that Eclipse is moving their component container to OSGi
> [1]. Avalon was one of the possible candidates, but it seems that only
> OSGi was seriously considered [2].
>
> OSGi was up to now mostly used in embedded systems (cars, automation),
> and its adoption by the Eclipse team will promote this platform to many
> more developpers, particularly in the J2EE world. I'm wondering [3] how
> this can impact the future of Avalon.
>
> What do you think?
>
My initial look at OSGi is that it is solving a different set of problems
than Avalon. Although with some of the work being done on the Avalon
repository, that may be different now.
My perception was that OSGi was working with the JAR==component outlook,
and had some nice features for loading and unloading these JARs. Avalon
OTOH, was working with smaller granularity components. So, in one sense,
they can work together. In fact, it might be a good marriage.
I haven't looked at them recently though.
--
"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org