|Alexander Broekhuis||Jan 10, 2012 10:30 pm|
|Marcel Offermans||Jan 10, 2012 10:55 pm|
|Pepijn Noltes||Jan 11, 2012 12:04 am|
|Martim||Jan 11, 2012 4:32 am|
|Sascha Zelzer||Jan 11, 2012 4:41 am|
|Sascha Zelzer||Jan 11, 2012 5:38 am|
|Alexander Broekhuis||Jan 12, 2012 2:15 am|
|Pepijn Noltes||Jan 13, 2012 2:24 am|
|Marcel Offermans||Jan 13, 2012 10:13 am|
|Marcel Offermans||Jan 13, 2012 10:23 am|
|Sascha Zelzer||Jan 17, 2012 12:56 pm|
|Pepijn Noltes||Jan 18, 2012 12:53 am|
|Alexander Broekhuis||Jan 23, 2012 1:09 am|
|Subject:||Re: Poddling status|
|From:||Pepijn Noltes (pepi...@gmail.com)|
|Date:||Jan 11, 2012 12:04:31 am|
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Marcel Offermans <marc...@luminis.nl> wrote:
On Jan 11, 2012, at 7:30 AM, Alexander Broekhuis wrote:
On the incubator list a discussion is going on about slow/small poddlings and how to handle these. Celix is one of these poddlings.
For Celix I see the following problems (at least): - No community growth (or not visible..) - No new committers - No releases made
I think a plan is needed to see how we can move Celix towards graduation, how we can get a community, more committers etc.
Agreed. The Incubator PMC in particular is interested in learning how the
community intends to address the issues that prevent a podling from graduating.
They feel that, especially after being in the incubator for over a year, a
graduation plan should be drafted.
Concerning the Celix community growth, at Thales Netherlands we are currently working on a research project in which Celix plays a big part. We are exploring the opportunity to use Celix as a middleware solution - replacing our propertairy solution - in our Radar development. We strongly feel this is going to be a succes and are the moment busy developing the OSGi Device Access Specification in Celix. We are planning to send a patch in the coming weeks. Hopefully this helps in supporting Celix :)
Looking at the three items, the first two will be the most difficult, and require the most attention. We have been working on visibility, going to the EclipseCon, ApacheCon and several other smaller local community events.
Again, I agree. While it is time to make a release as well, and this might
actually help people who want to take a look at Celix, the main issue that needs
to be addressed is the size and diversity of the community.
At these events you mention, no doubt you have talked directly to a bunch of
people. Could you somehow summarize their feedback?
What other communities can we possibly reach out to, and how?
I'd like to hear what people following this list think of these problems, and how we can move towards a healthy community. What is holding you back? What is needed to be able to adopt Celix? Feel free to express any concern or opinion you have. Either technical, documentation etc.
One question I've been getting occasionally is: "does Celix also work with
From a use case point of view, I think we could explore the scenario where you
have Java application that uses native code. Mostly, this is now done using JNI
which has the downside that it can take the whole JVM down if something goes
wrong in the native code. From a robustness point of view, this is unacceptable,
and I think Celix can be used to provide a better implementation. With this use
case, we can target any Java project that uses native libraries, which in turn
might help growing our community. Such use cases are probably interesting enough
to write about on all kinds of Java sites.
Good idea. I also think a working scenario with Celix instead of JNI is worth presenting to different Java user groups.