Talk:Netbinox

|| Because: why would you use Equinox when || Netbinox is fully compatible and much faster?

Because it would be work to replace Equinox everywhere it's used in my toolchain. Please consider sharing the love and donate to Equinox

Thanks,

Ron

--Ron Pomeroy 22:16, 20 December 2011 (CET)

Hello Ron, well the speedup is provided by six NetBeans modules and Equinox would need to take them, which is unlikely to happen. Anyway, I am supposed to visit OSGiCon in April 2012 talking about the fastest OSGi container on the planet, and I think your suggestion will be discussed there.

--JaroslavTulach 22:37, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Great blog you have here but I was wondering if you knew of any diisosscun boards that cover the same topics discussedhere? I'd really love to be a part of online community where I can get advice from other experienced people that share the same interest. If you have any recommendations, please let me know. Thank you!

--Jennifer 22:29, 25 June 2013 (CEST)

I don't know, aside from P2 bashing there is also P2 criitcs' bashing.If P2 hadn't entered 3.4 in M6 but in M3, there would be halve as much uproar. 472 open bugs is a joke when a product should be "feature complete" and is at RC1 status.And btw "number of closed bugs" or "percentage of closed bugs" must be the worst metric for software quality I've ever heard of. Write crappy software with trivial bugs and get kudos for closing these? Come on...The main criticism towards P2 is not that it's a good idea, it's not that it doesn't work - it's mainly that the update UI doesn't expose halve of the features, and the that the agent should not be used (That's from the wiki), and that P2 is too buggy to enter the game that late.

--Ashley 22:35, 25 June 2013 (CEST)