Re: [paho-dev] Paho plans
I happen to disagree with the wisdom of the Board's definition, but that doesn't have to do with anything...as I'm not questioning based upon impl language...I don't really care what language it's written in.
What I do care about is being able to use a framework provided by another EF project...seems to me that everyone should want other EF projects as consumers...but I guess community means different things to different people/companies.
As I've already made clear, I would be one such contributor for a java based Mqtt broker...but sadly, without the commitment of the project leads that seems unlikely to happen for a new project in incubation
I never said anything about a requirement. I simply thought that a new project might want some consumers/community members/supporters.
In the mean time ECF has little choice other than to use the work of other, non-EF projects in this area. Not what we would prefer to do.
Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The "powers that be" would be referring to the Eclipse Board.
Your viewpoint on what defines an Eclipse project is out of date. The Eclipse Board decided quite some time ago that we are willing to accept projects based on languages and platforms other than Java and OSGi. (Sorry, I'm on my phone or I'd provide a link. I'll do that in the morning. )
If sufficient contributors show up willing to create a Java MQTT broker as part of Mosquitto, that would be great. But there is no requirement for the existing project to port to Java.
On 10/4/2013 3:20 PM, Roger Light wrote:
> Hi Scott,
>> I suppose that this is more a question for Mosquitto than for Paho...but
>> since Mosquitto is a project proposal I suppose I should ask it here: If
>> Mosquitto doesn't integrate with OSGi runtimes...or Eclipse...in any
>> way...would it make sense to host the project at Eclipse?
> A good question to raise. The Eclipse Foundation "About" page makes no
> mention of Java or OSGi :) It does talk in terms of building
> frameworks for building and maintaining software, but my impression is
> that with the M2M side of thing the powers that be have a desire for a
> broader approach on the technology front.
I'm not sure who you are referring to with the 'powers that be'. Could
I have no objection to using C as an implementation
language...particularly as I imagine it could provide size and/or
performance benefits. But it would be nice if it also ran on the EF
runtime platform (OSGi framework) so that other EF projects could
actually use it as a framework. Currently that's not possible...i.e.
the vast majority of EF projects can't even use the framework. This
severely limits the usefulness to other EF projects...which hopefully
are at least a desired consumer of this work.
I'm not asking that the C implementation be at all
abandoned...rather...why not do what SWT did...and provide a java API
that uses the C implementation? Like I said, I would be willing to
contribute to such an effort...so that other EF projects could actually
consume/use this framework (ECF in my case, but I suspect that other
projects could be interested also).
Note I'm not asking this for the IDE/tooling per se...rather ECF is a
runtime project, and is primarily focused on supporting OSGi runtimes
and standards (e.g. OSGi remote services). So this request isn't about
the IDE...or even tooling more generally. A lot of work in the RT
project at EF is focused on OSGi server development, and in the abstract
M2M would be an ideal combination IMHO...lightweight brokers for
modular, lightweight OSGi servers.
All I'm asking is that you look to other EF projects as a prospective
community, and make it possible for them/us to consume this work. Not
that the existing codebase be abandoned or rewritten.
I'm of the opinion that supporting other EF projects should be some sort
of metric for all EF projects...so that we don't end up a loose
collection of unrelated projects...with no/little relationship other
than that we are hosted at eclipse.org...but that's just my opinion.
> It's without a doubt true
> that a big part of how EF works is down to the IDE, and that feels a
> bit odd when the C and Python that I'm interested do have nothing to
> do with the IDE, but I think that's just one of those things. If it
> genuinely was the opinion that it wouldn't make sense to host the
> project at Eclipse, then fair enough, no hard feelings, but I don't
> think that is the case. It just fits less under the IDE umbrella than
> the M2M umbrella, which is by its nature a bit of a different beast.
> Ponte and Paho (Java client notwithstanding; there are C, Lua, Python
> paho-dev mailing list
paho-dev mailing list