<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: OSGi-ggity-Giggity</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cwash.org/2009/04/15/osgi-ggity-giggity/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cwash.org/2009/04/15/osgi-ggity-giggity/?utm_source=rss&amp;utm_medium=rss&amp;utm_campaign=osgi-ggity-giggity</link>
	<description>+= construction + craftsmanship;</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 06:16:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Wash</title>
		<link>http://cwash.org/2009/04/15/osgi-ggity-giggity/comment-page-1/#comment-3224</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Wash</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2009 19:09:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cwash.org/?p=205#comment-3224</guid>
		<description>@Justin - Yeah, I think it provides what&#039;s needed to get code reuse right.  Stay tuned!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Justin &#8211; Yeah, I think it provides what&#8217;s needed to get code reuse right.  Stay tuned!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Justin Bleach</title>
		<link>http://cwash.org/2009/04/15/osgi-ggity-giggity/comment-page-1/#comment-3223</link>
		<dc:creator>Justin Bleach</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2009 15:20:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cwash.org/?p=205#comment-3223</guid>
		<description>I read the post and watched some of the video from the provided link and I have to say it sounds good to me too! Definitely going to have to find some more resources on it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I read the post and watched some of the video from the provided link and I have to say it sounds good to me too! Definitely going to have to find some more resources on it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Wash</title>
		<link>http://cwash.org/2009/04/15/osgi-ggity-giggity/comment-page-1/#comment-3220</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Wash</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2009 21:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cwash.org/?p=205#comment-3220</guid>
		<description>@Alex - Thanks for filling in the blanks there!  I was hoping someone would call out my lack of clarification around the JSRs.  I was generally aware of these but definitely not the guy to provide that update or speak intelligently about any of them...  :)  

I&#039;ll definitely take a closer look at 294 because I&#039;d really like to see constructs for modularity at the language level.  It would be a huge stride in terms of code reuse.  Also, the idea of having a concise, bootstrappable JVM &quot;kernel&quot; and modularized supporting JDK... Giggity to that as well!

My only concern is that some people may be put off by that thinking they have no options for dealing with modularity today or that such a feature is too far out for them to think about now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Alex &#8211; Thanks for filling in the blanks there!  I was hoping someone would call out my lack of clarification around the JSRs.  I was generally aware of these but definitely not the guy to provide that update or speak intelligently about any of them&#8230;  <img src='http://cwash.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />   </p>
<p>I&#8217;ll definitely take a closer look at 294 because I&#8217;d really like to see constructs for modularity at the language level.  It would be a huge stride in terms of code reuse.  Also, the idea of having a concise, bootstrappable JVM &#8220;kernel&#8221; and modularized supporting JDK&#8230; Giggity to that as well!</p>
<p>My only concern is that some people may be put off by that thinking they have no options for dealing with modularity today or that such a feature is too far out for them to think about now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex Buckley</title>
		<link>http://cwash.org/2009/04/15/osgi-ggity-giggity/comment-page-1/#comment-3219</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex Buckley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2009 17:28:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cwash.org/?p=205#comment-3219</guid>
		<description>What JSR &quot;trinity&quot;? If you are the type that keeps up with the JCP space, you&#039;ll know there was JSR 291 (OSGi R4.1) a couple of years ago and there is JSR 294 (Modularity in the Java language) now. JSR 294 offers to OSGi the possibility of true module/bundle-level encapsulation at runtime, and has numerous OSGi experts on its Expert Group. JSR 294 also handles dependency resolution at compile-time as well as runtime. Perhaps you should check it out.

You&#039;ll also know that JSR 277 is suspended, and that OpenJDK&#039;s Project Jigsaw is developing a small module system capable of bootstrapping the JVM and modularizing the JDK.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What JSR &#8220;trinity&#8221;? If you are the type that keeps up with the JCP space, you&#8217;ll know there was JSR 291 (OSGi R4.1) a couple of years ago and there is JSR 294 (Modularity in the Java language) now. JSR 294 offers to OSGi the possibility of true module/bundle-level encapsulation at runtime, and has numerous OSGi experts on its Expert Group. JSR 294 also handles dependency resolution at compile-time as well as runtime. Perhaps you should check it out.</p>
<p>You&#8217;ll also know that JSR 277 is suspended, and that OpenJDK&#8217;s Project Jigsaw is developing a small module system capable of bootstrapping the JVM and modularizing the JDK.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

