While there definitely exists a lot of improvements, and new features for the 2.2.0 release, I think that the current plan of a 2.2.0 on JVM 1.5+, to be followed by a 3.0 on JVM 1.6+ makes sense from a roadmap point of view. I know that would put 3.0 a little further down the road, but it will give users more time to adapt/plan before a forced upgrade.
What I'd like to see would be to have a user survey put forth, such as Apache Camel did, so that we can focus/refine our vision for the 3.0 release. Jamie 2011/1/13 Achim Nierbeck <[email protected]>: > Since there is so much new, and so good improvements with 2.2 > I don't see anything speaking against it :) > > >> I think we've agreed that Karaf 3.x would support JDK 1.6 only. >> Now, I'm wondering if we should rename 2.2 into 3.0 ;-) >> Thoughts ? >> >> >> 2011/1/4 Łukasz Dywicki <[email protected]> >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Some time ago I created issue KARAF-328 which is sticky card about JVM >>> version policy. >>> >>> >>> >>> Now I am a bit confused because I would like get rid XML parsing from >>> feature service and switch it to JAXB while working on KARAF-53. I know >>> that >>> build is made on JVM 1.5 and this change will broke capability with older >>> virtual machines. I wouldn't force anyone to upgrade but moving to new JVM >>> version can simplify our life a bit. :-) >>> >>> >>> >>> Note that CXF, ActiveMQ and Camel works with Java 1.5. We have JRE 1.5 and >>> JRE 1.6 profiles in jre.properties. From my point of view it is not a >>> problem to stay with 1.5 but if it make sense to stay with version which is >>> supported only if you pay Oracle for? As another note - JVM 1.5 was >>> released >>> in May 2004 and it is 6 year old. What do you think about that? >>> >>> >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Lukasz >>> >>> >> > >
