Guest
Welcome login


TIBCOmmunity > Blogs > OSGi > 2009 > December > 06
Home   Members Communities

OSGi

OSGi

Previous Next
2

So, what's next in OSGi?

Posted by Tim Diekmann Dec 6, 2009 7:50:00 PM

With the release of the Enterprise Profile beginning of 2010, this is not the end of the EEG

 

Our agenda is full and in full steam. In the next meetings we will go further into the details of

  • Subsystems, or what is commonly referred to as 'applications'. After agreeing on the requirements we are now commencing the detailed design work

  • OSGi Bundle Repository (OBR). This relatively old spec is now being worked on again after we have agreed on the requirements and mandated the detailed design work

  • Namespace. The support for namespaces was left out of the Blueprint spec in R4.2 and will now be completed

  • Weaving. The support for byte code weaving is essential to many specs, but quite difficult to do right.

  • Web Container API. The current spec does not allow for programmatic web app creation yet.

  • Multiple Extenders. The more extenders we have in the system, the more their interaction needs to be coordinated or the system becomes unpredictable. We have agreed on the requirements and start detailed design work now.

  • Asynchronous Communication. The integration of JMS and other pub/sub, request-response, etc. technologies will be a major part of the next OSGi version

... and many more interesting technologies.

 

You may also be interested to learn that OSGi APIs are finally catching up with JAVA 1.5 constructs. Thanks to interesting compiler options like -jsr14 it becomes possible to use Generics in the API while still providing backward compatibility for the mobile users, who's APIs are limited to 1.4.

 

Stay tuned,

 

Tim.

Tags: osgi, eeg
Add a comment Leave a comment on this blog post.

Comments

Guest links of london

it is really helpful for me to say!

Reply
Guest cheap true religion jeans

Thanks for your posting; Hope you can keep going. true religion jeans true religion

 

Reply