On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 06:54:12AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > To avoid to lost the users, I prefer to release Karaf 2.2.0 in the > current state.
+1 to this > Karaf 3.0.0 should contain significant improvements and changes. > > Maybe, it could be interesting to write a roadmap wiki page to > define what will be included in Karaf 3.0.0. I'm not sure if we want to work on an additional source here. I would prefer that we "layout" the 3.0.0 release directly in Jira setting issues to a target release? This helps organising us and always presenting the "state" of the next release... > For example, Karaf 3.0.0 could contain: > - Karaf clustering and instances replication > - Tooling (karaf maven plugin including dist, etc) > - New deployer (wrapping jar, etc) > > Regarding this, it means that we should release Karaf 2.2.0 soon. +1, but well, we're only waiting for Aries to get out :) > Regards > JB > > On 01/13/2011 09:35 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: > >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 > >> > >> > > > >
pgpgkNOoOSySz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
