OK, with all said IMHO we should really decide if we want a (a) 2.3 branch or (b) keep forcing on master. In case (a) do we drop (a1) m2 & jdk5 or do we continue with (a2) m2 and jdk5? In case of (b) we should really chop down the roadmap to get a release out in some realistic time frame...
TBH I can live with both options;though I'm a little bit in favor of option (b) (you know; release early, release often :)) Kind regards, Andreas On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 12:40 AM, mikevan <[email protected]> wrote: > > jgoodyear wrote: >> >> Hi Mike, >> >>> Just so that I understand what we're talking about, because I haven't >>> seen >>> it articulated, is this the progression path being decided on? >>> 2.1.5 - Last maintenance release for the 2.1.x branch >>> 2.2.x - Still maintained (maintenance - bug fixes only) >>> 2.3.x - New features (development - new features allowed until release) >>> 3.0.0 - Next Major upgrade (development) >> >> The 2.1.x branch will continue to receive patches as required, however >> once 2.3 and/or 3.0 branches are in release I would expect new 2.1.x >> patches to fade away. To my knowledge however we have not formally >> decided on a cut off point for branch support. The rest of the >> progression path appears to be about as I understand it to be at this >> time :) >> >> Cheers, >> Jamie >> >> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 7:14 PM, mikevan <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Johan Edstrom-2 wrote: >>>> >>>> +1 on dropping 1.5 >>>> >>>> >>>> On Apr 17, 2011, at 9:34 PM, Freeman Fang wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 2011-4-16, at 上午6:50, Guillaume Nodet wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I kinda agree with David here. IIRC, we decided to go for a 3.0 >>>>>> mainly because of the switch to JDK 1.6. So we should release that >>>>>> asap and add more features when they are ready in the following 3.1 >>>>>> and 3.2 releases. I'm not really in favor of maintaining two >>>>>> development versions (2.3 and 3.0) at the same time. >>>>>> >>>>>> However, having a 3.0 will certainly break most of the existing >>>>>> downstream projects, as they certainly use a [2.2,3.0) range for >>>>>> imports, meaning they won't deploy on the new 3.0, so we definitely >>>>>> not to do that unless we need. So my position would be continue on >>>>>> 2.x and drop jdk 1.6 compatibility in 2.3. I think other projects >>>>>> have done that too and I haven't heard many complaints. >>>>> Yeah, agree with Guillaume here. >>>>> >>>>> Since Camel 2.7(but not 3.0) drop jdk1.5 support so I believe it's ok >>>>> for >>>>> us to do same in karaf 2.3. >>>>> >>>>> Freeman >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 00:39, Jamie G. >>>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> It's a bit of a balancing act here deciding against a new 2.x branch >>>>>>> and a proper 3.0 release I agree. The general concern I think is >>>>>>> providing enough time for large number of major changes to appear in >>>>>>> version 3 trunk. Where major changes denote a large departure from >>>>>>> how >>>>>>> Karaf 2.x works. By making a 2.3 branch we give some breathing space >>>>>>> for 3.0 development to continue. That being said if the community is >>>>>>> more in favor of pushing up the 3.0 date instead of a 2.3 branch then >>>>>>> that could work as well. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jamie >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 7:41 PM, David Jencks >>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> I think an alternative would be to release 3.0.0 soon and put the >>>>>>>> new >>>>>>>> features on trunk. I've found that its much easier to create new >>>>>>>> branches than to maintain them. Could someone explain why a new >>>>>>>> branch is better than a soon 3.0.0 release? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> thanks >>>>>>>> david jencks >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Apr 15, 2011, at 8:50 AM, Jamie G. wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi All, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There has been a number of discussions regarding trying out new >>>>>>>>> features on the 2.x branch while we are continuing to work towards >>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>> 3.0.x release, as such I think it may be worth discussing if we'd >>>>>>>>> like >>>>>>>>> to create a Karaf 2.3 branch? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This branch would contain new features to the 2.x branch, and back >>>>>>>>> ported features from the 3.0 line. As this is a 2.x branch it would >>>>>>>>> continue to be JDK 1.5 & m2 compatible - we move to JKD 1.6 & m3 on >>>>>>>>> the Karaf 3.0 line. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> At this point I would presume the logical branch cut line would be >>>>>>>>> starting from the 2.2.1 tag once available? The 2.2.x line would >>>>>>>>> continue on in support mode, with 2.3.x collecting new features. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>> Jamie >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Guillaume Nodet >>>>>> ------------------------ >>>>>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ >>>>>> ------------------------ >>>>>> Open Source SOA >>>>>> http://fusesource.com >>>>>> >>>>>> Connect at CamelOne May 24-26 >>>>>> The Open Source Integration Conference >>>>>> http://camelone.com/ >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------- >>>>> Freeman Fang >>>>> >>>>> FuseSource >>>>> Email:[email protected] >>>>> Web: fusesource.com >>>>> Twitter: freemanfang >>>>> Blog: http://freemanfang.blogspot.com >>>>> Connect at CamelOne May 24-26 >>>>> The Open Source Integration Conference >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> Personally, I'd like to see a release with the new and modified console >>> commands, as the developers on my team are ready to use them. The ones I >>> worked on will work with 2.x, as they were written to work with 1.5. >>> >>> Agree with Guillaume though, we shouldn't introduce JDK 1.6 until 3.0. >>> 2.x >>> projects will likely want to make use of the 2.3 features, but requiring >>> 1.6 >>> will break some of them. A project using 2.x will see using 2.3 as the >>> natural upgrade path, making 2.3 not backwards compatible is not >>> intuitive. >>> >>> Just so that I understand what we're talking about, because I haven't >>> seen >>> it articulated, is this the progression path being decided on? >>> 2.1.5 - Last maintenance release for the 2.1.x branch >>> 2.2.x - Still maintained (maintenance - bug fixes only) >>> 2.3.x - New features (development - new features allowed until release) >>> 3.0.0 - Next Major upgrade (development) >>> >>> ----- >>> Mike Van (aka karafman) >>> Karaf Team (Contributor) >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Create-Karaf-2-3-x-branch-tp2825055p2867577.html >>> Sent from the Karaf - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> >> > > Thanks Jamie. By way of continuing the discussion, I'd like to ask that > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-560 KARAF-560 be included in > 2.3. If 2.2.1 is still collecting enhancements, I'd also ask that include > KARAF-560 as well. > > > ----- > Mike Van (aka karafman) > Karaf Team (Contributor) > -- > View this message in context: > http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Create-Karaf-2-3-x-branch-tp2825055p2867917.html > Sent from the Karaf - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
