|Re: [equinox-dev] R6 httpservice update|
I think your work in the "bridged" environment fits well with our existing implementation of the HttpService. Our implementation has a base bundle that implements the details of the HttpService, but the backing webcontainer implementation is left to something else (another bundle). For example, we provide a separate bundle that uses jetty to implement the backing container. This is what is used to serve up help in Eclipse. But our base http service implementation can also be embedded in a "bridged" scenario with a WAR using any hosting JEE server.
I think it would be great to get your involvement in the project. If you have some proof of concept code we can certainly work towards nominating you as a committer for ongoing work to develop an R6 HttpService implementation within the Equinox project.
Raymond Auge ---03/06/2014 02:19:24 PM---Hey guys, Some of you may be aware that I'm working on a very prototypical (pre
From: Raymond Auge <raymond.auge@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date: 03/06/2014 02:19 PM
Subject: Re: [equinox-dev] R6 httpservice update
Sent by: equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > There are no definite plans to implement the R6 httpservice
> > implementation.
> > But this is something I would like to see happen.
> FWIW...me/us too. For context: we have remote service providers that
> depend upon HttpService, and it would be very nice for those and other
> providers to use the R6 HttpService updates as soon as possible.
> We also have a pending contribution of a remote service provider that's
> based upon/uses websockets  and would like to make that contribution
> available to our consumers in Luna timeframe.
I'm glad to hear there are folks interested, but we still need someone to drive the implementation.
> >In order for it to
> > happen though we need an owner to step up to implement it.
> Perhaps this could be done by multiple committers collaborating
> cross-project rather than (e.g.) one equinox committer. Perhaps also the
> corporate members (others of which would probably also like to see
> this...is my guess) could contribute support to such cross-project
I was not intending to say this work has to be done by a single committer. But we do need someone with enough vested interest to drive this to completion.
> >I know Gunnar
> > showed interest, but I don't know if he is in the position to drive the
> > implementation.
> I don't know either. Unfortunately I cannot commit to drive it
> myself...I've got enough on my own plate already. Although I can/would be
> willing to contribute/collaborate.
I'm willing to start a branch for the work, but I myself cannot spend lots of time on it either. After all I have to convince my employer to pay me for this work also ;-)
> >As for Luna, this cannot happen since the spec will not
> > be
> > done in time.
> Is that true? I was under the impression that the rfc-189 work would be
> in R6.
It is but that is R6 compendium. Compendium R6 is not going to be ready in time for Luna. I'm actually not sure when it will be final. I just sat through an EG meeting today and there is still significant work going on in the RFC. We have API freeze for Luna tomorrow (M6).
> >We would need to start in a branch that can be merged to
> > master at an appropriate time for a release.
> Sure. Is this something that can/should be discussed at the
> RT-PMC...and/or at upcoming EclipseCon? Seems to me likely that many (at
> least) runtime projects likely use HttpService...and so I suspect you and
> I are not alone in wanting to see it happen.
Sure we can discuss this at EclipseCon.
equinox-dev mailing list