You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@felix.apache.org by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> on 2008/06/02 10:06:38 UTC
More to come [was; Re: [VOTE] Accept Pax Logging donation from OPS4J]
On Monday 02 June 2008 15:17, Niklas Gustavsson wrote:
> +1 (non-binding, hoping for more to come)
>
Since there is a lot of overlap between Felix and Pax projects, both in terms
of people as well as codebases, the two communities have discussed this back
and forth for a long time.
I think the consensus is roughly like this;
* For codebases that implements official OSGi specifications, it belongs
in Felix.
* For codebases that benefit from a Open Participation policy, it belongs
in OPS4J.
The first is pretty straight forward.
The second part is perhaps less obvious. OPS4J has a "No barrier" policy, in
principle "Wiki brought to Coding", "Don't send us the patch, commit it and
we'll take a look at it." approach. This seems to work very well, especially
for code that is not central enough for someone to have a keen interest to
maintain it on a daily basis.
Pax will remain its "platform neutrality" identity, and Pax Logging will be
released under its current name, and possibly independent of Felix release
cycles, for this purpose.
In the near future, Pax Web will also be donated, as it is an implementation
of the OSGi Log Service spec.
I don't have much expectations of codebases "re-locating" from Felix to the
Pax project on the basis of the above, other than individuals outside the
Felix project grabbing the sources and continue to evolve at OPS4J. If/when
that happens we can discuss this matter further.
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
Re: More to come [was; Re: [VOTE] Accept Pax Logging donation from OPS4J]
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
It's not really a problem to have Apache projects depending on other
external projects,
especially when they are under ASL. I don't think there is any legal
issues here.
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Alin Dreghiciu <ad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> With Pax Logging this is a non issue but with other projects as Pax
> Web we have to sort out what we are doing with the artifacts that pax
> web (or other projects we are moving) depends on.
> For example Pax Web depends on ops4j base and ops4j pax swissbox.
> There are some solutions as:
> 1. move also those projects to felix
> 2. include what is needed from those projects in pax web
> 3. new Felix HttpService based on Pax Web depends on ops4j projects
>
> For me 1 looks like not in the line of only moving the implementation,
> 2 seems like a lot of maintenance work regarding later on eventual
> merges from Pax Web to Felix f in Pax Web we still keep those projects
> as dependencies, so 3 looks like the most viable option but I do not
> know if Apache projects can depend on non Apache projects.
>
> Alin Dreghiciu
>
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 11:06 AM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
>> On Monday 02 June 2008 15:17, Niklas Gustavsson wrote:
>>> +1 (non-binding, hoping for more to come)
>>>
>>
>> Since there is a lot of overlap between Felix and Pax projects, both in terms
>> of people as well as codebases, the two communities have discussed this back
>> and forth for a long time.
>>
>> I think the consensus is roughly like this;
>>
>> * For codebases that implements official OSGi specifications, it belongs
>> in Felix.
>>
>> * For codebases that benefit from a Open Participation policy, it belongs
>> in OPS4J.
>>
>>
>> The first is pretty straight forward.
>> The second part is perhaps less obvious. OPS4J has a "No barrier" policy, in
>> principle "Wiki brought to Coding", "Don't send us the patch, commit it and
>> we'll take a look at it." approach. This seems to work very well, especially
>> for code that is not central enough for someone to have a keen interest to
>> maintain it on a daily basis.
>>
>> Pax will remain its "platform neutrality" identity, and Pax Logging will be
>> released under its current name, and possibly independent of Felix release
>> cycles, for this purpose.
>>
>>
>> In the near future, Pax Web will also be donated, as it is an implementation
>> of the OSGi Log Service spec.
>>
>> I don't have much expectations of codebases "re-locating" from Felix to the
>> Pax project on the basis of the above, other than individuals outside the
>> Felix project grabbing the sources and continue to evolve at OPS4J. If/when
>> that happens we can discuss this matter further.
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>> --
>> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
>>
>> I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
>> I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
>> I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Alin Dreghiciu
> http://www.ops4j.org - New Energy for OSS Communities - Open
> Participation Software.
> http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java - Domain Driven Development.
> http://malaysia.jayway.net - New Energy for Projects - Great People
> working on Great Projects at Great Places
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
Re: More to come [was; Re: [VOTE] Accept Pax Logging donation from OPS4J]
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Monday 02 June 2008 18:05, Alin Dreghiciu wrote:
> With Pax Logging this is a non issue but with other projects as Pax
> Web we have to sort out what we are doing with the artifacts that pax
> web (or other projects we are moving) depends on.
> For example Pax Web depends on ops4j base and ops4j pax swissbox.
Correct.
> There are some solutions as:
> 1. move also those projects to felix
> 2. include what is needed from those projects in pax web
> 3. new Felix HttpService based on Pax Web depends on ops4j projects
>
> For me 1 looks like not in the line of only moving the implementation,
> 2 seems like a lot of maintenance work regarding later on eventual
> merges from Pax Web to Felix f in Pax Web we still keep those projects
> as dependencies, so 3 looks like the most viable option but I do not
> know if Apache projects can depend on non Apache projects.
In principle, ASF projects can depend on other Apache licensed projects, both
in source and binary form. So, I think 3. is totally feasible and probably
recommended.
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
Re: More to come [was; Re: [VOTE] Accept Pax Logging donation from OPS4J]
Posted by Alin Dreghiciu <ad...@gmail.com>.
With Pax Logging this is a non issue but with other projects as Pax
Web we have to sort out what we are doing with the artifacts that pax
web (or other projects we are moving) depends on.
For example Pax Web depends on ops4j base and ops4j pax swissbox.
There are some solutions as:
1. move also those projects to felix
2. include what is needed from those projects in pax web
3. new Felix HttpService based on Pax Web depends on ops4j projects
For me 1 looks like not in the line of only moving the implementation,
2 seems like a lot of maintenance work regarding later on eventual
merges from Pax Web to Felix f in Pax Web we still keep those projects
as dependencies, so 3 looks like the most viable option but I do not
know if Apache projects can depend on non Apache projects.
Alin Dreghiciu
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 11:06 AM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> On Monday 02 June 2008 15:17, Niklas Gustavsson wrote:
>> +1 (non-binding, hoping for more to come)
>>
>
> Since there is a lot of overlap between Felix and Pax projects, both in terms
> of people as well as codebases, the two communities have discussed this back
> and forth for a long time.
>
> I think the consensus is roughly like this;
>
> * For codebases that implements official OSGi specifications, it belongs
> in Felix.
>
> * For codebases that benefit from a Open Participation policy, it belongs
> in OPS4J.
>
>
> The first is pretty straight forward.
> The second part is perhaps less obvious. OPS4J has a "No barrier" policy, in
> principle "Wiki brought to Coding", "Don't send us the patch, commit it and
> we'll take a look at it." approach. This seems to work very well, especially
> for code that is not central enough for someone to have a keen interest to
> maintain it on a daily basis.
>
> Pax will remain its "platform neutrality" identity, and Pax Logging will be
> released under its current name, and possibly independent of Felix release
> cycles, for this purpose.
>
>
> In the near future, Pax Web will also be donated, as it is an implementation
> of the OSGi Log Service spec.
>
> I don't have much expectations of codebases "re-locating" from Felix to the
> Pax project on the basis of the above, other than individuals outside the
> Felix project grabbing the sources and continue to evolve at OPS4J. If/when
> that happens we can discuss this matter further.
>
>
> Cheers
> --
> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
>
> I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
> I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
> I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
>
--
Alin Dreghiciu
http://www.ops4j.org - New Energy for OSS Communities - Open
Participation Software.
http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java - Domain Driven Development.
http://malaysia.jayway.net - New Energy for Projects - Great People
working on Great Projects at Great Places
Re: More to come [was; Re: [VOTE] Accept Pax Logging donation from OPS4J]
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Monday 02 June 2008 16:53, Niklas Gustavsson wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> > In the near future, Pax Web will also be donated, as it is an
> > implementation of the OSGi Log Service spec.
>
> Assuming you mean "Http Service" :-)
Doh!!
> Anyways, it was Pax Web, Web Extended and Pax URL I was hoping for.
> Having Pax Web over would be great.
Pax Web is the compliant Http Service and coming here. However, all the nifty
extenders are intended to stay with Pax, since
a) they are not specifications,
b) a lot of suggestions and activity are happening
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
Re: More to come [was; Re: [VOTE] Accept Pax Logging donation from OPS4J]
Posted by Niklas Gustavsson <ni...@protocol7.com>.
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> In the near future, Pax Web will also be donated, as it is an implementation
> of the OSGi Log Service spec.
Assuming you mean "Http Service" :-)
Anyways, it was Pax Web, Web Extended and Pax URL I was hoping for.
Having Pax Web over would be great.
/niklas