Me neither :)
> I think we really should switch to jdk6 but I really do not like the idea
> doing so during a minor release... :(
> On Apr 9, 2011 6:50 PM, "Achim Nierbeck" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I'm unsure about the 3.0 version also.
>> There are certain things on the road-map which are still not fully
>> discussed
>> for example the clustering thing. At least I didn't see anything on the
>> mailing-list
>> for this :)
>> From my feeling we are not at close to a 3.0 version yet.
>> Probably need a 2.3 then I guess, on the other hand we stated that we do
>> switch
>> to Java 6 and since Java 7 is on the road we really should get some
>> momentum on this :)
>>
>> Regards, Achim
>>
>> Am 09.04.2011 15:05, schrieb Andreas Pieber:
>>> Mhm... I've no problems by delaying 3.x longer, but in this case I
>>> think we may should also develop on a 2.3.x release? There are already
>>> (and there will be more over the next weeks) features on 3.x branch
>>> (which could be backported easily) which are very valuable and which
>>> we could/should make available faster.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Andreas
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Jamie G. <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>>>> I'm partial to the mantra of "release early, release often", but I'd
>>>> say we should at least be talking 2 months out for Karaf 3.0.0.
>>>>
>>>> I've been holding off starting up the user survey just to give the
>>>> development direction of the 3.x branch some time to come into focus.
>>>> If it is felt that we should accelerate however then perhaps this
>>>> survey project can be bumped up the priority list.
>>>>
>>>> I'm also keeping in mind that we have a 2.2.1 and 2.1.5 release
>>>> already on the work queue, so some community dev cycles are going to
>>>> be allocated to those over the next few weeks, instead of focussing on
>>>> trunk.
>>>>
>>>> As to the Karaf 3.x for m3 and Karaf 2.x for m2 compatibility, I'm
>>>> liking the idea. Karaf 2.x is already the JDK 1.5 compatible line,
>>>> we'd just redefine it as the JDK 1.5 / m2 line. Karaf 3.x being JDK
>>>> 1.6+, m3.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Jamie
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 7:32 AM, Andreas Pieber <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>>>>> Hey guys,
>>>>>
>>>>> We're having some open issues belonging to mvn3 (KARAF-504,
>>>>> KARAF-482). IMHO we should rather make karaf-3 available quite soon
>>>>> (1-2 month), fix all m3 issues there and define karaf-2.x officially
>>>>> compatible to m2? WDYT?
>>>>>
>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>> Andreas
>>>>>
