It sounds good to me, we can do the http common module work later. -- Willem Jiang
Red Hat, Inc. Web: http://www.redhat.com Blog: http://willemjiang.blogspot.com (English) http://jnn.iteye.com (Chinese) Twitter: willemjiang Weibo: 姜宁willem On December 10, 2014 at 5:06:02 PM, Christian Schneider (ch...@die-schneider.net) wrote: > I agree with Dan that a common module and one module for jetty8 and one > for jetty9 is probably the best route to go. Like Willem mentioned we > can even try to create a http common module if possible. I would start > with a jetty based common module first as it is probably the easier step. > > I am not yet sure how to do the sepearation between the common and the > jetty version dependent part. To get a better feeling for it I started > to simply switch the client part to jetty 9 in the current module. So I > can see how the new jetty 9 based module wouldd look like. I plan to > have this fully working till end of the week and will commit it in a > temporary branch for you guys to review. > > As a next step we should then define the separation between the modules. > The last step would then be to implement the three modules. > > For the karaf feature I plan to use the new conditional descriptors to > install the correct module depending on the karaf runtime. So for karaf > 2.4 and 3 it should install the jetty8 one and for karaf 4 it should > install the jetty 9 one. > Both of the modules would be installed with the same feature camel-jetty > and the same prefix jetty: . So this should minimize the impact on > users. This approach should also allow us to work with an upcoming jetty 10. > > Do we all agree that on camel master we only need to support jetty 8 and > 9 and can safely remove jetty 7 support as Dan has already done? > > Christian > > On 09.12.2014 11:18, Daniel Kulp wrote: > > Jetty 8 (and 7) are already end of life so we’re trying to figure out the > > “best” way to get > Jetty 9 support so we can get a camel-jetty component that can use a > supported version > of Jetty. So for Camel 2.15, the question, to me, is how to support both 8 > and 9 (assuming > we need to support 8 which I think is a good assumption). > > > > We could have separate “camel-jetty” and “camel-jetty8” components, but > > there would > be a huge amount of code duplication which is always a concern. Another > option is a camel-jetty-common > with then the two subcomponents depending on that. That would reduce the > duplication, > but would obviously then add another jar/bundle. Not sure if that is a big > deal. We could > shade that into the two others. Test class duplication would still be a > problem. > > > > > > Dan > > > > > -- > Christian Schneider > http://www.liquid-reality.de > > Open Source Architect > http://www.talend.com > >
