It could be interesting indeed.
Honestly, I prefer to have one distribution named Apache Karaf and work
to be very extensible for the users.
David's work on a MOJO to create custom distributions based on one that
we provide is a good design. We need to review it and work on these basis.
Regards
JB
On 05/04/2011 07:34 PM, Andreas Pieber wrote:
In fact i proposed two things :-) one to cut down the number of
distributions into online and offline depending on the number of packages
they contain and virtually any number of distributions based on features
making them visible during the startup. The second one is to split the
"non-core" parts out of karaf to keep a sleek karaf core.
It is neither exactly what Guillaume proposed, nor anybody else, but rather
a mixture ;-)
So I think this some up my ideas explained in more detail quite well. I am
currently on my mobile phone. I can write this down in more detail once I am
back to my PC if required.
Kind regards Andreas
On May 4, 2011 7:15 PM, "mikevan"<[email protected]> wrote:
Andreas Pieber wrote:
In fact I think we should take a look how far we really want to break
down the various components. What really should be extracted. Although
there are various possibilities to split Karaf I would roughly suggest
something like: management, web, clustering, spring (to finally get
the spring things out of the "real" core :)). Since there are 13 PMCs
(if Jamie stays at releasing karaf-core there are still 12 remaining)
I think it should be possible to find 4 PMCs willing to take over the
release process for those components. I have no problem taking one
myself (which means 3 remaining :))...
Kind regards,
Andreas
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 6:30 PM, Jamie G.<[email protected]>
wrote:
The website just requires committer status.
According to this a PMC is 'preferred', as the PMCs are responsible
for their projects distribution directory at Apache.
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain
Cheers,
Jamie
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 1:49 PM, mikevan<[email protected]>
wrote:
jgoodyear wrote:
As a reminder our release process is posted here:
http://karaf.apache.org/index/developers/release-guide.html
To my knowledge those instructions should be sufficient to allow
anyone the ability to perform a Karaf release, the only caveat I
believe is that they have committer status as its required to perform
tags& uploads (not sure if PMC is required or not when it comes to
nexus).
Cheers,
Jamie
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Jamie G.
<[email protected]>
wrote:
Very true Mike. I've been picking up release duties as required. I
have no claim at all to doing them other than if/when I'm actively
assigned and working upon a particular release Jira task.
Cheers,
Jamie
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 1:04 PM, mikevan
<[email protected]>
wrote:
Christian Schneider wrote:
+1
I think clustering is important enough to be part of the enterprise
features.
Christian
Am 04.05.2011 14:01, schrieb Ioannis Canellos:
Guys, we are getting off topic.
Even though I like Guillaume's ideas about central repository etc,
it
is
still hypothetical since the mechanism is not implemented yet and
thus
we
can't base our decisions on that.
What we currently have is standard/enterprise features descriptor.
What I
am
saying is that clustering should be part of the enterprise
features
descriptor *(and probably hosted as subproject)*. Once we
implement
the
central repository mechanism we can move it there.
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Guillaume
Nodet<[email protected]>
wrote:
--
----
http://www.liquid-reality.de
Subprojects sounds like a good idea on the face, but it really comes
down to
a management issue. Who is going to be responsible for each
sub-project?
Right now we have a few folks who are working on Karaf in addition
to
other
open-source projects. IMHO, we should not have a sub-project unless
we
have
someone willing to be responsible for it. I also don't think Jamie
should
be that one person for all sub-projects. However, if we can get
folks
to
accept responsiblity for them, I think its a great idea.
-----
Mike Van (aka karafman)
Karaf Team (Contributor)
--
View this message in context:
http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Subprojects-was-VOTE-Add-Cellar-into-Karaf-trunk-tp2897884p2899307.html
Sent from the Karaf - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hmm.. I thought PMC was required for a release, or is that just for the
site?
-----
Mike Van (aka karafman)
Karaf Team (Contributor)
--
View this message in context:
http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Subprojects-was-VOTE-Add-Cellar-into-Karaf-trunk-tp2897884p2899495.html
Sent from the Karaf - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Is this different than what Guillaume originally suggested? The original
suggestion seemed aimed more at creating customer distributions of Karaf,
and this seems like breaking up optional functionality into subprojects...
I'm a tad confused.
-----
Mike Van (aka karafman)
Karaf Team (Contributor)
--
View this message in context:
http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Subprojects-was-VOTE-Add-Cellar-into-Karaf-trunk-tp2897884p2899744.html
Sent from the Karaf - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
