Re: [equinox-dev] OSGi code

[Olivier Gruber <ogruber@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Nope, sounds good to me.

Dynamic plug-in effort can fake a lot of things until the platform is 
really capable of dynamically loading and unloading plug-ins.

However I wanted to engage a bit on design as we ramp up.
Should it be on the mailing list or the newsgroup ?

Before anything else, I feel that we need to discuss a bit how we
see the Eclipse platform evolving. I wanted to start with Eclipse 
as it is and discuss what we see changing and why. I feel it would
allow everyone to level set a bit on the one hand. On the other hand,
I have the feeling that we could get into a quick agreement.
I see three major discussion threads.

        - Component Model
        - Self-hosting architecture
        - Dynamic plug-ins

The first two are below the plug-in registry. The third is above.
I will send emails to kick off the discussions soon.
Let me know if it is more appropriate to have those discussions
on the newsgroup.

Thanks again Jeff for getting it up and running.
Best regards,

Olivier Gruber, Ph.D.
Persistent & Distributed Object Platforms and Frameworks
IBM TJ Watson Research Center

Jeff McAffer/Ottawa/IBM@IBMCA Sent by: equinox-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx 02/19/2003 11:58 PM

To:        equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx         cc:                 Subject:        [equinox-dev] OSGi code

I am going to populate the Equinox CVS repo in the next day or so.  For clarity I have been planning on pulling over just the Eclipse Platform plugins.   

Also, since we have only one repo and several people working on the same plugins, I propose that we use CVS branches.  Efforts like Dynamic plugins and OSGi will go on in separate branches. 

Comments? 

Jeff