Hi


On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 10:40 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net>
wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> I understand that Karaf/OSGi is not in the Camel community target
> anymore, and it makes sense.
> I proposed a time ago to refactor the approach of Camel components for
> Karaf, using special packaging (embedded the deps as private to avoid
> to have bunch of SMX bundles deps), etc.
>
> Even at Karaf, there are discussions about the next step in the
> project decoupled from OSGi (see Minho).
>
> I would split the discussion in two parts:
> - In terms of the roadmap/Camel future, I don't think it's worth it
> for Camel community to maintain OSGi/Karaf support anymore. It's
> always possible to wrap Camel routes in an uber jar and deploy in
> Karaf.
> - In terms of community/maintenance, I think camel-karaf could be part
> of the Karaf community. We had a similar discussion about jclouds: the
> jclouds community didn't want to maintain jclouds-karaf anymore (for
> the same reasons as the Camel community). The jclouds community asked
> the karaf community if they were interested in maintaining and
> managing jclouds-karaf. So we can do the same for camel-karaf: the
> karaf community can take the lead there and maintain it.
>
> Thoughts ?
>
>
Yes i Agree on this JB.

- Move camel-karaf to Apache Karaf as a new karaf-camel sub-project, and
let the community and committers in that project take over maintaining and
releasing this.
- For Camel v4 onwards then camel-karaf will no longer be part of Apache
Camel.
- Karaf Camel is released under a new GAV - org.apache.karaf.camel, and no
longer org.apache.camel.karaf.
- Camel v4 core and component JARs will no longer generate OSGi MANIFEST.MF
as Karaf Camel will be responsible for this (if even needed); such as JB
talks about a new way of packing and running things in Karaf.
- For Camel v3 we keep as-is and maintain and release camel-karaf until
Camel 3 is EOL




> Regards
> JB
>
> On Sat, Nov 26, 2022 at 9:51 AM Andrea Cosentino <anco...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello
> >
> > I'll come back for other questions. Let me just say that camel-karaf is
> too
> > hard to maintain today. If it won't be released because of misalignments,
> > it should be aligned by some volunteers or community member and released
> > later. Active contributors are not really focused on Karaf runtime and we
> > cannot do everything. This doesn't mean we won't release camel Karaf
> > anymore. It only means it could be released later on. Even after the core
> > camel and SB part have been released.
> >
> > In more than one situation aligning OSGi stuff have been really hard.
> Less
> > and less community members are helping on the Karaf side and releasing
> > sometimes have been slow down by these troubles. Also OSGi have been drop
> > in a lot of 3rd party libraries.
> >
> > So I'm +1 with this approach.
> >
> > I'll continue the discussion in the next days for the other points.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> >
> > Il ven 25 nov 2022, 15:06 Nicolas Filotto <nfilo...@talend.com> ha
> scritto:
> >
> > > Hi Claus,
> > >
> > > That sounds like a good plan, here are the first questions that I have
> in
> > > mind:
> > >
> > >   *   Why do we need to keep on releasing new LTS versions of Camel 3?
> > >   *   Why not simply consider 3.20 as the last LTS version of Camel 3
> and
> > > only maintain it?
> > >   *   What kind of features/improvements do you want to add to Camel 3
> > > after releasing 3.20?
> > >   *   If camel-karaf is released independently, when will it be
> released?
> > > My fear is that it will be desynchronized with Camel very quickly.
> > >   *
> > >
> > > With 2 LTS of Camel 3 and 2 LTS of Camel 4 per year, it would mean 4
> LTS
> > > versions to support at the same time, don't you think that it is too
> many?
> > >
> > > I'm wondering if it is not a good opportunity to rethink our LTS
> version
> > > policy. Could you please remind me why we decided to have this policy
> (2
> > > LTS versions per year supported for one year)?
> > >
> > > I would personally prefer to have:
> > >
> > >   *   only one LTS version per year (or 2 if we keep on releasing LTS
> > > versions of Camel 3) but supported for at least 2 years instead of one
> > > otherwise Camel users are less inclined to migrate to the latest LTS
> > > version because 1 year of support doesn't really worth the migration
> > > effort, especially for big projects where the migration takes several
> > > months.
> > >   *   only propose milestone versions or equivalent between 2 LTS
> versions
> > > for early adopters to add more clarity on which versions are LTS.
> Indeed,
> > > for example, the next LTS version will be 3.20 while we could expect
> 3.22
> > > to be the next one after 3.14 and 3.18. With this logic, instead of
> > > releasing 3.19 and 3.20, we could have released 3.19 M1 and 3.19, it
> would
> > > then be obvious to the Camel users that only 3.19 is an LTS version as
> all
> > > final versions would then be LTS versions.
> > >
> > > What do you think of it?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Nicolas
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com>
> > > Sent: Friday, November 25, 2022 11:42
> > > To: dev <dev@camel.apache.org>
> > > Subject: Camel 4 roadmap and affect on Camel 3
> > >
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > This is a proposal for a plan for Apache Camel 4 and how this can
> affect
> > > Camel 3.
> > >
> > > Summary
> > >
> > > =======
> > >
> > > The overall scope is that the leap from Camel 3 to 4 is a lot less than
> > > going from Camel 2 to 3.
> > >
> > > And that we have a timebox approach where we aim for a 6 month period
> of
> > > work.
> > >
> > > The need for Camel v4 is mainly driven by Java open source projects
> > > migrating to jakarta APIs,
> > >
> > > and to keep up with popular runtimes a la Spring Boot and Quarkus, and
> to
> > > jump to the next major Java version.
> > >
> > > Goals
> > >
> > > =====
> > >
> > > a) Primary Goals
> > >
> > > 1) Migrate from javax -> jakarta (JEE 10)
> > >
> > > 2) Java 17 as base line
> > >
> > > 3) Spring Framework 6
> > >
> > > 4) Spring Boot 3
> > >
> > > 5) Quarkus 3
> > >
> > > b) Release Goals
> > >
> > > 6) Release only what is ready (JEE10 / Java17 etc)
> > >
> > >     This means that Camel components that are not ready (yet) will be
> > > dropped in a release until they are ready.
> > >
> > > 7)  Release core + spring boot together
> > >
> > > 8)  Release camel-karaf independently (like we do for other Camel
> projects)
> > >
> > > c) Major Goals
> > >
> > > 9) Support Java 17 features such as records, multiline strings, and
> what
> > > else
> > >
> > > 10) EIP model without JAXB dependency
> > >
> > > 11) Endpoint URI parsing (do not use java.net.URI)
> > >
> > > 12) Deprecate message.getIn()
> > >
> > >       use getMessage() instead
> > >
> > > 13) Deprecate camel-cdi
> > >
> > > 14) Deprecate/Remove MDC logging (complex and buggy and does not fit
> modern
> > > app development)
> > >
> > > d) Minor Goals
> > >
> > > 15) Remove MEP InOptionalOut (not in use)
> > >
> > > 16) Remove JUnit 4 support
> > >
> > >
> > > Timeline
> > >
> > > =======
> > >
> > > The timelines are ESTIMATES and the number of releases can vary
> depending
> > > on need and how far we are in the process
> > >
> > > Feb 2023: Camel 4.0 milestone 1
> > >
> > > Mar 2023: Camel 4.0 milestone 2
> > >
> > > Apr 2023: Camel 4.0 RC1
> > >
> > > May 2023: Camel 4.0
> > >
> > > Aug 2023: Camel 4.1 LTS
> > >
> > > Oct 2023: Camel 4.2
> > >
> > > Dec 2023: Camel 4.3 LTS
> > >
> > > The plan is to start working on Camel 4 after the next Camel 3 LTS
> release,
> > > e.g. 3.20 which is planned for next month (December 2022).
> > >
> > > For Camel 3 then we slow down in releases and provide 2 LTS releases
> per
> > > year.
> > >
> > > For example a scheduled could look as follows:
> > >
> > > Dec 2022: Camel 3.20 LTS
> > >
> > > Jun 2023: Camel 3.21 LTS
> > >
> > > Dec 2023: Camel 3.22 LTS (last Camel v3 release, supported until Dec
> 2024)
> > > ???
> > >
> > > Jun 2024: Camel 3.23 LTS (last Camel v3 release, supported until Dec
> 2025)
> > > ????
> > >
> > > Each Camel 3 LTS release will likely also contain less new features and
> > > improvements as previously, as our focus and work shifts to Camel v4
> > > instead.
> > >
> > > As a recipient of an email from Talend, your contact personal data
> will be
> > > on our systems. Please see our privacy notice. <
> > > https://www.talend.com/privacy/>
> > >
> > >
> > >
>


-- 
Claus Ibsen
-----------------
@davsclaus
Camel in Action 2: https://www.manning.com/ibsen2

Reply via email to