aries-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeremias Maerki <...@jeremias-maerki.ch>
Subject Re: [SPI Fly] Interest for a more dynamic plug-in/service discovery API?
Date Tue, 23 Oct 2012 06:25:40 GMT
Thanks for your feedback, Jeremy! I'd argue that IP clearance is
absolutely necessary in this case since it's a clean-room development
entirely by me, it's a relatively small codebase and I'm an Apache
member with an ICLA on file. But I have no problem going through with it
if this is preferred. After all, I've guided a larger contribution
through back in 2006 already.


Jeremias Maerki


On 22.10.2012 17:26:12 Jeremy Hughes wrote:
> On 22 October 2012 11:01, David Bosschaert <david.bosschaert@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm not sure what the rules are here but if you can't propose it as a
> > non-committer I would be happy to propose it for you.
> >
> > Anyone else any thoughts?
> 
> Sure. The voting process dictates whose votes are binding and I would
> expect one of those people to commit the code if the vote is
> successful.
> 
> Jeremias, I support you bringing this to Aries. Thank you (in fact I
> already mentioned it our last  board report that you had contributed
> it :-) Since you developed your code outside the ASF you should look
> at: http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html
> 
> Thanks you!
> 
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > David
> >
> > On 22 October 2012 08:04, Jeremias Maerki <dev@jeremias-maerki.ch> wrote:
> >> Dear gods of war, ;-)
> >>
> >> would it be ill taken if I started an acceptance vote on this as a
> >> non-committer? I'd like to get a decision since I need to know soon if
> >> this will live on under org.apache package names or not. It doesn't
> >> really matter to me which way in the end.
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >> Jeremias Maerki
> >>
> >>
> >> On 09.10.2012 17:00:21 Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> >>> Thanks for the additional proposal! Spire is quite nice, but in the end
> >>> I went with SPI Catch for now as it emphasizes the relationship with SPI
> >>> Fly. I have no problem renaming it, though.
> >>>
> >>> I've opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARIES-938 and attached
> >>> the initial submission.
> >>>
> >>> You're absolutely right about the possible confusion with distributed
> >>> discovery. I have a little such component of my own that has "discovery"
> >>> in its name. Sticking with a reference to "SPI" is certainly a good
> >>> thing.
> >>>
> >>> There is a little snag that currently, the OSGI-side integration test
> >>> doesn't work for some reason when running from within the Maven build.
> >>> It works for me inside Eclipse. I've spent more than half my day
> >>> tracking this down but so far to no avail (suggestions welcome). But I
> >>> don't think this should block an acceptance vote.
> >>>
> >>> So, any questions, objections or other comments on this proposal?
> >>>
> >>> If not I'd be grateful if the Aries committership would vote on the
> >>> acceptance of the new component. Please note that this is not intended
> >>> as a code drop. I plan to make further live tests and to publish the
> >>> necessary changes to Apache FOP and Batik to apply SPI Catch and make
> >>> those projects first-class OSGi citizens. The bundles are going into a
> >>> a test environment of an application that is planned to go live in
> >>> January 2013. However, I don't expect SPI Catch to gain considerably
> >>> more functionality in the future since its scope is rather narrowly
> >>> defined. But I'm dedicated to hanging around here to help anyone who
> >>> finds this useful. If it can help flesh out OSGi Connect, all the better.
> >>> I'll also try to help out with SPI Fly and other topics.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Jeremias Maerki
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 08.10.2012 11:44:00 David Bosschaert wrote:
> >>> > Hi Jeremias,
> >>> >
> >>> > I wouldn't take the discovery one as discovery in the OSGi context
is
> >>> > often associated with distributed discovery in the context of the
> >>> > Remote Services and Remote Service Admin specs.
> >>> >
> >>> > I just came up with one other name suggestion: Spire (where SPI stands
> >>> > for SPI and 'RE' stands for reuse both inside and outside of OSGi
> >>> > contexts :-)
> >>> >
> >>> > In any case the name is probably not super important right now. Just
> >>> > pick one that you like for the submission proposal. Refactoring tools
> >>> > in IDEs like Eclipse should make it easy enough to rename later if
> >>> > someone comes up with a better name.
> >>> >
> >>> > Cheers,
> >>> >
> >>> > David
> >>> >
> >>> > On 8 October 2012 10:34, Jeremias Maerki <dev@jeremias-maerki.ch>
wrote:
> >>> > > Agreed. So, let's narrow down the name suggestions to two:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > - org.apache.aries.discovery
> >>> > > - org.apache.aries.spicatch (SPI Catch, i.e. the opposite of SPI
Fly)
> >>> > >
> >>> > > I prefer the latter since it has a cheeky touch and still retains
the
> >>> > > relationship with SPI Fly.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > WDYT? Better ideas?
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Cheers,
> >>> > > Jeremias Maerki
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > On 08.10.2012 11:03:30 David Bosschaert wrote:
> >>> > >> Sounds good to me.
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> Just one note, I think it should not necessarily be a sub-component
of
> >>> > >> SPI Fly. Yes, it uses that for some of its functionality,
but I think
> >>> > >> that's really an implementation detail. I think it should
be a
> >>> > >> top-level component in its own right.
> >>> > >> Just to compare, there are other components that depend on
the Aries
> >>> > >> proxy functionality, but still they are not sub-components
of
> >>> > >> aries-proxy.
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> Cheers,
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> David
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> On 8 October 2012 09:47, Jeremias Maerki <dev@jeremias-maerki.ch>
wrote:
> >>> > >> > Hi David
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> > Great! I think the process should be easy:
> >>> > >> > - We decide on a (package) name.
> >>> > >> > - I change the package structure after that decision.
> >>> > >> > - I'll try to come up with a POM (I'm no big Mavener)
> >>> > >> > - I put together a submission which I'll upload to JIRA.
> >>> > >> > - It is debatable whether I need to file a code grant
but I have
> >>> > >> > developed that all by myself and I'm an ASF member (with
an ICLA on file).
> >>> > >> > It's also not that big a contribution. So I don't think
this is
> >>> > >> > necessary.
> >>> > >> > - The Aries committership votes on acceptance.
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> > So, back to naming. What shall it be?
> >>> > >> > - org.apache.aries.spifly.consumer
> >>> > >> > - org.apache.aries.spifly.discovery
> >>> > >> > - org.apache.aries.discovery
> >>> > >> > - org.apache.aries.plugin.discovery
> >>> > >> > - org.apache.aries.spi.catch ;-)
> >>> > >> > - other ideas?
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> > Cheers,
> >>> > >> > Jeremias Maerki
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> > On 08.10.2012 10:02:32 David Bosschaert wrote:
> >>> > >> >> Hi Jeremias,
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >> On 5 October 2012 14:58, Jeremias Maerki <dev@jeremias-maerki.ch>
wrote:
> >>> > >> >> >> Next question is would it make sense to
add this functionality to Aries?
> >>> > >> >> >> I think it does. To me many of the ideas
in here match with the OSGi
> >>> > >> >> >> Connect RFP 145 (http://www.osgi.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=145)
and
> >>> > >> >> >> I think that, besides its practical use
today, this code could be a
> >>> > >> >> >> valuable input to the standardization process
of OSGi Connect. Overall
> >>> > >> >> >> the charter of OSGi Connect is to create
a dynamic services
> >>> > >> >> >> environment that works both inside OSGi
and out. To me the overall
> >>> > >> >> >> goal of your code seems similar.
> >>> > >> >> >> If we all agree that it would be suitable
for this component to reside
> >>> > >> >> >> in Aries, I think we should strive to make
it ultimately compliant
> >>> > >> >> >> with the OSGi Connect spec, when that's
available.
> >>> > >> >> >>
> >>> > >> >> >> Does this make sense to you?
> >>> > >> >> >
> >>> > >> >> > As I understand it OSGi Connect's goal is to
use a subset of the OSGi
> >>> > >> >> > framework (most importantly the service layer
but not the module layer).
> >>> > >> >> > So you can use the OSGi ServiceTracker to lookup
services. In that case,
> >>> > >> >> > my library isn't needed and probably not very
useful, since it actually
> >>> > >> >> > strives not to use OSGi APIs at all. So, I'm
not quite getting your
> >>> > >> >> > point here. I got about one too many hints that
some people may have
> >>> > >> >> > reservations when introducing OSGi to a plain
Java project ("Do we all
> >>> > >> >> > have to learn OSGi? Can I still use X in plain
Java? etc."). OSGi,
> >>> > >> >> > unfortunately, is still not as widely adopted
as I would like. I've
> >>> > >> >> > noticed how a low-level ServiceTracker can provoke
reactions like: "Does
> >>> > >> >> > it have to be that complicated?" At least, until
they get the power of
> >>> > >> >> > it. So, my main goal was to really just shield
everyone from OSGi as
> >>> > >> >> > much as possible. Basically, I just wanted to
provide an easy migration
> >>> > >> >> > path without the requirement to learn about
OSGi beyond including
> >>> > >> >> > manifest metadata. If my thingy helps OSGi Connect,
that's great but I
> >>> > >> >> > frankly don't see how. I'm probably still missing
something.
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >> I get your point. From a very high level both OSGi
Connect and your
> >>> > >> >> project aim at getting to use OSGi easier, however
OSGi Connect
> >>> > >> >> strives to do this by introducing the OSGi APIs early
(before the
> >>> > >> >> modularity layer) whereas your approach strives to
do this by
> >>> > >> >> introducing the OSGi APIs late (or not at all, even).
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >> Personally I think choice is good and it's up to
the users to really
> >>> > >> >> decide what technology they want to use. I think
your technology would
> >>> > >> >> be at the right place in Apache Aries, so if you're
happy to donate it
> >>> > >> >> I would be happy to support that and I can find out
the process by
> >>> > >> >> which this should be done.
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >> All the best,
> >>> > >> >>
> >>> > >> >> David
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >
> >>


Mime
View raw message