I'm not sure I see it quite that way. Look at the example of log4j. Is it not
true that the java.util.logging framework is implementation agnostic and JSE in
fact ships with a log4j implementation of it. Similarly, I could see the same
thing happening with a modularity framework -- Sun can have their perceived
rudder by having a top-level framework that ships with JEE, but underneath uses
OSGi by default. And given the nature of the beast, it probably shouldn't be
all that bad to write adapters for things to work in a variety of modularity
frameworks. I'm not seeing a big problem here.
Alexey
2001 Honda CBR600F4i (CCS)
1992 Kawasaki EX500
http://azinger.blogspot.com
http://bsheet.sourceforge.net
http://wcollage.sourceforge.net
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
- Josh, on the go
Here is my current understanding:
OSGi is a very dynamic thing, with lots of plugin support. You have to
design the interfaces of how all the different "bundles" fit together.
You have to work out all the contracts about what interactions can occur
across boundaries. Existing third party libraries cannot just become a
bundle - do get all the benefit from OSGi you really want their APIs
designed to fit in with the OSGi model. You have to add manifests to
control the visibility across bundle boundaries. This is ideal for
things like Eclipse where Eclipse wants to define a framework that other
people plug in to. Everything is dynamic, you can turn bits on and off
while everything is running, Eclipse define all the contracts that
everyone else conform to, etc.
Then there are the other two JSRs.
JSR 294 deals with introducing better scope of visibility than just the
package level scope. It allows me to break a complex set of classes
into multiple packages, but still control what to make 'public' to
consumers of the code I develop. Its a language level thing, improving
on the current public/protected/package scope stuff. It is not
dynamic. It does not require interfaces to be defined and contracts to
be agreed to on how all the different bits are going to play together.
It does not require any change to deal with existing third party
libraries. It is useful to me even if I use OSGi.
JSR 277 is a static module system. It is not infrastructure for
dynamically pluggable components. It does not require all parties to
agree to contracts on how everything is going to plug together with
interfaces defined for all the APIs. It is more of a static
organizational thing.
I really like OSGi and am planning to use it Real Soon Now on a project
I am doing. This is because I really need a dynamic pluggable framework
and I can define all the contracts between the plugins. JSR 294 feels
nice to me - better ability to control visibility is nice for internal
code management. JSR 277 I don't think I have a personal need for. My
understanding is it imposes less constraints and has less I have to do
to use it, but for my particular current need I don't think it will give
me any benefit. (This does not mean its not useful to others.)
But it is clearer in my mind that they are not tackling the same
problem. Overlapping problem space yes, but they are not the same thing.
Alan
Disclaimer: I have not used any of these technologies. Just my
understanding based on the SE podcast I listened to.
I don't think the idea was that lots of developers were leaving in
droves to Ruby (though a few high profile people were, as I recall).
The idea is to expand the scope of the Java platform and bring in more
new developers. JRuby was low hanging fruit. It already existed,
Ruby had a growing community, and the JRuby project itself needed some
support. So we hired the JRuby guys so they could work on it full
time. Sounds good to me!
Next is PHP which will have NetBeans support in NB 6.1.
I believe a Groovy plugin for NB is underway as well, but I don't know
it's status.
> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "The Java Posse" group.
> To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse-...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit t
- j
> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "The Java Posse" group.
> To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse-...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javapo
- j
http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz/2008/02/quick-introduction-to-tamarin-tracing.html
-James
- Josh