3 ms·
I was just about to comment on how using OSGi probably doubles your engineering effort (and cost!) quite substantially for very little benefit. Source: I've de
by zubnix 7y ago
I was just about to comment on how using OSGi probably doubles your engineering effort (and cost!) quite substantially for very little benefit.
Source: I've developed OSGi applications professionally for nearly 9 years.
btw I <3 Jitsi Meet
- oftenwrong 7y agoYet the Jitsi developer seems to credit OSGi as an essential basis of the project. They suggest that such a modular and dynamic architecture was necessary to support so all these protocols, platforms, etc. What would you suggest as an alternative (including things that are available now, but not then)?
- hedora 7y agoThe parent comment here implies they rewrote it after the article was written. I read the bit on OSGi. It seems to support interfaces, runtime loading and unloading of modules, and a way to discover modules. Java 1.0 did all that stuff natively, though JPMS adds some more capabilities, since I guess people don’t like package private, etc. C++ also supports these things. (C does too, but you need non-standard dynamic linker constructor/destructor extensions that are available on all platforms). I can’t think of any widely used language without support of such things.