FYI, ServiceMix 4.4.0 plans to use Karaf 2.2.0 and Camel 2.7: http://servicemix.apache.org/roadmap.html
That's why Hadrian's commit could be helpful for the next ServiceMix release. Without this patch, I need to update the ServiceMix release plan: - to have ServiceMix 4.4.0 powered by Karaf 2.1.x and Camel 2.7 (and I need to check for other parts such as ActiveMQ, etc) - to have ServiceMix 4.5.0 powered by Karaf 2.2.x and Camel 2.8 (and dependencies alignment using OBR) Regards JB On Thu 10/03/11 11:44, "Claus Ibsen" claus.ib...@gmail.com wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbarcea@g > mail.com> wrote: > Claus, in your comment to CAMEL-3763, when you say > "We have not throughly tested this" who exactly do you refer to as > "we"? > > > Apache CI servers > CI servers at FuseSource > People in the community using trunk code > Committers such as myself keep running local builds on my laptop and my XP > box etc. > > There is absolute no way that patch could have been tested thoroughly > as it was not committed to the codebase. > > > > > The patch was there for a couple of days, you had > another 3 days, that's a total of 5 days to come up with a technical reason > pointing to what exactly this patch breaks and if there is or not an > acceptable workaround. I have no problem redoing the release (I may figure > out the manual problem until then too). However, let's do things > right. > > The patch was scheduled for Camel 2.8 and Jean said OK. Jean also > later said he would like the patch for Apache SMX 4.4. > Apache SMX 4.4 is AFAIK not to be released in the next short time > frame. In fact SMX 4.3.0 has just been released. > > > > > > I see now that Willem already reverted the patch, > not clear why, I assume just based on your feelings. I would be very > interested in seeing Guillaume's opinion, as a Karaf/OSGi > expert. > > > I really dont understand why you would think its "no brainer" to make > such a big change "seconds" before you cut the release. > You are usually very good and careful when you do the releases. > > The ticket its not a blocker for the 2.7 release. And it was already > scheduled for Camel 2.8. > And in terms of OSGi you have to be extra careful and test it more > thoroughly than a simpler fix in a plain Camel component. > The OSGi tests runs at the end of the CI process and thus they are > more prone to not be run due test failures in pre-existing components. > We all know it can be a little tricky to have CI 100% green. > Hence its a good practice to also run those OSGi tests locally once in > a while to ensure it works well. > > > Camel 2.6 and 2.7 is using Karaf 2.1.x version. Karaf 2.1.x is a > stable release. Now in its 4th release. > Also SMX 4.3 release is using Camel 2.6 + Karaf 2.1.x which is a combo > we know works well. > > > Karaf 2.2.0 has just been released with a new OBR feature which the > patch started to use. This is not a "no brainer" change. > We should give the code much more time to test, hence wait for Camel > 2.8 which gives it 6 weeks or more time to test it throughly. > > And just after the Camel 2.7.0 has been released at Apache. We can > apply the patch to the trunk and work on making it work well for Camel > 2.8 (or Camel 2.9) and the SMX 4.4 release. > > > And whether its OSGi or not, we should not go around making bigger > changes just before you cut the release. > The lead up time until you do the cut is usually a week or even > longer, where the CI servers keep testing the code throughly. > And committers such as myself and maybe some ppl in the community. > > > > I would like to ask you why you fell that the patch is a "must have" > for Camel 2.7? > > > > > > Cheers, > > Hadrian > > > > > > On Mar 10, 2011, at 6:33 AM, Claus Ibsen > wrote: > > >> I am casting a -1 due CAMEL-3763 > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-3763 >>> > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 1:45 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea > <hzbarcea@g > mail.com> wrote: >>> Note: > >>> > >>> The manual was again not generated > correctly. It does get generated properly using mvn install, but it fails > during release:prepare/perform. >>> I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-3774 to > track this problem. >>> > >>> I generated it manually though to not delay > the release any longer and published it temporarily to http://people.apache.org/~hadrian/camel-2.7.0/manual/ for review and will move it to the main site if this release is approved. > IMHO this is not a blocker for the release. >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> Hadrian > >>> > >>> > >>> On Mar 10, 2011, at 1:31 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea > wrote: >>> > >>>> A new release apache-camel-2.7.0 is out > with approximately 169 issues resolved: new features, improvements and bug > fixes. >>>> > >>>> Please find the staging repo > here: >>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecam > el-010/ >>>>> The tarballs are here > >>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecam > el-010/org/apache/camel/apache-camel/2.7.0/ >>>>> > >>>> Please review and vote to approve this > release binary. Your vote counts! >>>> > >>>> [ ] +1 Release the binary as Apache > Camel 2.7.0 >>>> [ ] -1 Veto the release (provide > specific comments) >>>> Vote is open for 72 hours. > >>>> > >>>> Here's my +1 > >>>> Hadrian > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Claus Ibsen > >> ----------------- > >> FuseSource > >> Email: cibsen@ > fusesource.com >> Web: http://fusesource.com >>> Twitter: davsclaus > >> Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/ >>> Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/ >> > > > > > > -- > Claus Ibsen > ----------------- > FuseSource > Email: cibsen@ > fusesource.com Web: http://fusesource.com Twitter: davsclaus > Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/ Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/ > >
