+1 to everything so far. I'd also tempted to ask for Alex's REST API changes for bundle management merged: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/0dd24780fc8491b6c735a7cedeba8c 5fb332c21f208c1cfa7259f012@%3Cdev.brooklyn.apache.org%3E These seem like an important part of the "easy bundle management for blueprint developers" story.
Replacing the classic RPM with a Karaf one makes me slightly nervous; I'm concerned if an `rpm --upgrade` would work from a classic version into a Karaf version without breaking anything. But I think there are few users using the RPM, and we are in a 0.x release series, so I would be content if the release notes described a manual uninstall-old, install-new procedure. I'm also wondering if there's anything that should be marked "deprecated" while we have the chance. I think we should aim for Brooklyn 1.0 after this next release, and so this is our last chance to shine a torch on the legacy stuff before we hit the big number (and a stricter deprecation policy). (See also the mailing list link above.) I had considered if we should call this one "1.0", but that would mean that we would have to support the classic version for the 1.x series, which is probably not something we want to do. Richard. On 8 September 2017 at 17:15, Thomas Bouron <[email protected] > wrote: > Hi all > > I just pushed a PR for the RPM/DEB packages[1]. It's mostly done but still > have issue with DEB and upstart. > I'll try to fix it as quickly as I can. > > Best. > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/brooklyn-dist/pull/104 > > On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 at 12:19 Thomas Bouron <[email protected] > > > wrote: > > > I think it would be confusing for a user to have 2 sets of RPM/DEB > > packages: one for classic launcher and one for Karaf launcher. > > > > I'm in favour of having only one set that uses exclusively the Karaf > > launcher (also, that mirrors what we had up until now, i.e. only one > > RPM/DEB set that was using the classic launcher instead of Karaf) > > > > Best. > > > > On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 at 11:36 Duncan Godwin <[email protected] > om> > > wrote: > > > >> Following on from that, I have made a PR to make the karaf release the > >> primary one and release the old one as `classic` > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/brooklyn-dist/pull/103 > >> > >> Thanks for your input Thomas. I think that we should only release one > set > >> of RPM and deb packages and make those the karaf version in this > release. > >> This means that anyone who wants to use the classic version will need to > >> use the classic tar.gz or zip. What does everyone think? > >> > >> Many thanks > >> > >> Duncan > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On 7 September 2017 at 17:19, Thomas Bouron < > >> [email protected] > >> > wrote: > >> > >> > Hi Duncan. > >> > > >> > I agree, a new version of Brooklyn would be great. I particularly > >> support > >> > the change of making Karaf the default distribution. > >> > I'm actually working on various improvements of the RPM and DEB > >> packages, > >> > and make them use Karaf as well. I should push a PR for this next > week. > >> > > >> > Regarding the PR, brooklyn-server/799 has been merged already. > >> > > >> > Cheers > >> > > >> > On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 at 16:54 Duncan Godwin < > >> [email protected] > >> > > > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > Hi All, > >> > > > >> > > It's probably about time for a Brooklyn 0.12.0 release. There have > >> been > >> > > significant developments since 0.11.0 which warrant a new release. > >> Before > >> > > we produce this however I propose we make the following changes: > >> > > > >> > > - Make Karaf the default distribution with the current `classic` > >> launch > >> > > method depreciated > >> > > - Update the documentation accordingly > >> > > - Merge brooklyn-server/805 and probably brooklyn-server/799 > >> > > > >> > > Are there any other changes which people think should be included? > >> > > > >> > > Let us know your opinions and if there are no outstanding problems I > >> can > >> > > progress with the release next week. > >> > > > >> > > Many thanks > >> > > > >> > > Duncan > >> > > > >> > -- > >> > > >> > Thomas Bouron • Senior Software Engineer @ Cloudsoft Corporation • > >> > https://cloudsoft.io/ > >> > Github: https://github.com/tbouron > >> > Twitter: https://twitter.com/eltibouron > >> > > >> > > -- > > > > Thomas Bouron • Senior Software Engineer @ Cloudsoft Corporation • > > https://cloudsoft.io/ > > Github: https://github.com/tbouron > > Twitter: https://twitter.com/eltibouron > > > -- > > Thomas Bouron • Senior Software Engineer @ Cloudsoft Corporation • > https://cloudsoft.io/ > Github: https://github.com/tbouron > Twitter: https://twitter.com/eltibouron >
