karaf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Guillaume Nodet <gno...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Proposal - Lightweight standalone remote OSGi implementation for karaf-cellar
Date Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:52:16 GMT
2016-02-22 13:21 GMT+01:00 Łukasz Dywicki <luke@code-house.org>:

>
> > Wiadomość napisana przez Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@apache.org> w dniu 22
> lut 2016, o godz. 09:33:
> >
> > 2016-02-12 16:42 GMT+01:00 Sascha Vogt <sascha.vogt@gmail.com <mailto:
> sascha.vogt@gmail.com>>:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> we (a colleague of mine and myself) started searching for a
> >> high-performance / lightweight remote OSGi implementation. We have a
> >> requirement that the implementation has to /also/ (in addition to Karaf)
> >> run on a heavily customized JBoss 7.1.1 as well, so the lightweight part
> >> was kinda important ;)
> >>
> >> We stumbled accross http://moi.vonos.net/java/dosgi-fabric/ which talks
> >> about using the "old" dosgi implementation from Fabric8 (former Fuse
> >> ESB). We had a look and we really liked it. Performance wise it comes
> >> really close to RMI with about 30% overhead at 10k invocations of a
> >> service sending back and forth a simple string on the same host. Using
> >> different hosts the times were identical. Yes I know, that's not a
> >> "real" use case, but it made us confident in taking a deeper look. It
> >> also only has two external dependencies (hawtdispatch and hawtbuf, both
> >> ASL-2 licensed).
> >>
> >> So now the proposal: Resurrect the old Fabric8 implementation, directly
> >> at the karaf-cellar subproject. As the copyright of the original code
> >> belongs to RedHat, Guillaume could you ask internally if the following
> >> resources could be donated to the Karaf project?
> >
> > I've asked RedHat about the possible donation. I'll keep you posted, but
> > keep in mind in case the outcome is positive, it can take quite a while
> > before the code is actually moved (the legal stuff tend to be much longer
> > than the technical stuff…)
>
> I haven’t seen any vote if Karaf community is interested in picking up
> fabric code to their codebase so I wouldn’t worry about Red Hat legal stuff
> yet but first try to clarify what would be benefit for Karaf from getting
> this piece of code. There is already support for dosgi in Cellar (I haven’t
> seen performance results of it in this topic), and as pointed earlier by
> scope this donation could also fit ECF (maybe be even better to go there).
> More over at this moment current shape of Cellar would require major
> refactoring to integrate fabric code. I remember a long discussion before
> Cellar donation to Karaf was accepted where main concerns were raised by
> former Fuse Source employees. Result of this fight caused that Cellar
> become subproject, not a Karaf core module. I also remember that long time
> ago I had a private conversation on IRC with Ioannis, a Cellar creator,
> shortly after he started working for Red Hat, about extraction of common
> interfaces between Cellar and Fabric, however back then it wasn’t possible
> cause usage of different distribution mechanisms.
>
> Please explain me what is happening now, cause both projects stayed with
> their stuff, so Ioannis points are still valid. More over Fabric
> implementation and people using it are now abandoned by Red Hat which
> discontinued development on this part of project some time ago (maintaining
> it in private fork I suppose) which makes me wonder about real intention
> and scope of this donation.
>

You see things backward.  RedHat has not proposed to donate the code.  I've
been asked on this list if RedHat would actually donate the code.  That's
quite different.

As for why the code suits Johannes and Sasha's need better than the CXF or
the Cellar one, I'm sure they can answer that part if not already done.

And you're right we don't really need to start any legal stuff at this
point.  We first need to decide if the Karaf community wants this code
along with 2 committers to maintain it.
Actually, I think Aries may be a better choice for this code, especially if
the goal is to somehow merge efforts from CXF / Karaf communities.


> Kind regards,
> Łukasz
> —
> luke@code-house.org
> Twitter: ldywicki
> Blog: http://dywicki.pl
> Code-House - http://code-house.org




-- 
------------------------
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Red Hat, Open Source Integration

Email: gnodet@redhat.com
Web: http://fusesource.com
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message