Talk:EquinoxCompatibility
From APIDesign
(Comment provided by Richard S. Hall - via ArticleComments extension) |
(Comment provided by Prakrathi - via ArticleComments extension) |
||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
--Richard S. Hall 20:10, 14 July 2010 (CEST) | --Richard S. Hall 20:10, 14 July 2010 (CEST) | ||
| + | </div> | ||
| + | == Prakrathi said ... == | ||
| + | |||
| + | <div class='commentBlock'> | ||
| + | That is completely unbalstendadre.I've been contemplating doing this as well, but was wondering how you approached those specific hurdles.I'm not a lawyer, but the OPC specs are published under the RCL (never heard of it) but it states under the RCL your changes, bug fixes, extensions, etc. must be made available to the community. I figure the term community ties the source and changes back to foundation members.If we do tackle this, I would hope to make it official (as Utgard is on the OPC website) but also be able to keep it open-source.Thank you for your feedback! | ||
| + | |||
| + | --Prakrathi 08:29, 21 October 2013 (CEST) | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
Revision as of 06:29, 21 October 2013
Comments on EquinoxCompatibility <comments />
Richard S. Hall said ...
I guess you are right (although there is always way to provide AlternativeBehaviors), it is better to follow the spec (especially if the TCK is improved to cover the case). On the other hand, this is not true containerism: the (mis)behavior was the same in Equinox 3.5 as well as in Felix. Otherwise I would find out I need to pass in null sooner.
--JaroslavTulach 18:03, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Richard S. Hall said ...
Yeah, it was unfortunate that there was a similar issue in both. I've added a test case for this for Felix at least, but one should probably be added to the OSGi CT too.
--Richard S. Hall 20:10, 14 July 2010 (CEST)
Prakrathi said ...
That is completely unbalstendadre.I've been contemplating doing this as well, but was wondering how you approached those specific hurdles.I'm not a lawyer, but the OPC specs are published under the RCL (never heard of it) but it states under the RCL your changes, bug fixes, extensions, etc. must be made available to the community. I figure the term community ties the source and changes back to foundation members.If we do tackle this, I would hope to make it official (as Utgard is on the OPC website) but also be able to keep it open-source.Thank you for your feedback!
--Prakrathi 08:29, 21 October 2013 (CEST)
Follow
I'm not a believer in being backwards compatible with bugs, otherwise there'd be no end. The spec is the law of the land in the OSGi world, so that's what bundles should expect to get. If we weren't strict with that, then bundles would continue to depend on containerisms even after they were corrected.
--Richard S. Hall 03:50, 14 July 2010 (CEST)