You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@karaf.apache.org by JT <ka...@avionicengineers.com> on 2017/01/15 09:31:55 UTC

Wire Admin Service

Hello All,

This isn't specific to Karaf but I wondered if anyone knows if there are any implementations of the OSGi Wire Admin service specification (chapter 108 of of the OSGi compendium spec.) Looks like this is not a widely used spec?

Thanks, Kerry


Re: Wire Admin Service

Posted by JT <ka...@avionicengineers.com>.
Thanks Chris, I'll take a look. I had read elsewhere and got the impression that 'hard-wiring' connections doesn't fit with the OSGi model however I'm not entirely convinced, dependent upon the application of course. I need to read through the spec in full to get a good understanding of it but I'll take a look at your suggestions.


On 15/01/17 11:14, chris.gray@kiffer.ltd.uk wrote:
> Knopflerfish certainly has an implementation, and I believe Equinox and
> mBS have also. But I would agree that it's not widely used (I have never
> used it myself). Maybe because the idea of explicitly creating
> point-to-point connections does not really fit the OSGi model?
>
>> Hello All,
>>
>> This isn't specific to Karaf but I wondered if anyone knows if there are
>> any implementations of the OSGi Wire Admin service specification (chapter
>> 108 of of the OSGi compendium spec.) Looks like this is not a widely used
>> spec?
>>
>> Thanks, Kerry
>>
>>
>
>


Re: Wire Admin Service

Posted by ch...@kiffer.ltd.uk.
Knopflerfish certainly has an implementation, and I believe Equinox and
mBS have also. But I would agree that it's not widely used (I have never
used it myself). Maybe because the idea of explicitly creating
point-to-point connections does not really fit the OSGi model?

> Hello All,
>
> This isn't specific to Karaf but I wondered if anyone knows if there are
> any implementations of the OSGi Wire Admin service specification (chapter
> 108 of of the OSGi compendium spec.) Looks like this is not a widely used
> spec?
>
> Thanks, Kerry
>
>