Easy and straightforward ! I like it :) +1 for Karaf OSGi and Karaf Minho ?
Thanks, Regards JB On Fri, Oct 7, 2022 at 1:54 PM Francois Papon <francois.pa...@openobject.fr> wrote: > > May be we can rename Karaf 4.x to Karaf OSGi as it's mainly focus on it. > > > On 07/10/2022 13:52, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > > The idea is to be clear and consistent across the project: > > > > Karaf xxx for current Karaf 4.x runtime > > Karaf Minho > > Karaf Winegrower > > Karaf Cellar > > Karaf Cave > > Karaf Decanter > > > > Like in Apache Felix. > > > > Regards > > JB > > > > On Fri, Oct 7, 2022 at 1:35 PM Francois Papon > > <francois.pa...@openobject.fr> wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> Ok for Apache Karaf Minho but please, don't rename Apache Karaf 4.x to > >> Apache Karaf Classic :D > >> > >> regards, > >> > >> Francois > >> > >> On 07/10/2022 12:57, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > >>> My preference is Apache Karaf Minho. > >>> > >>> What do you think to rename Karaf 4.5.0 with a different name too ? In > >>> order to avoid any confusion: Apache Karaf is the umbrella project and we > >>> will have only subprojects (like in Felix). > >>> > >>> Thoughts ? > >>> > >>> Regards > >>> JB > >>> > >>> Le jeu. 6 oct. 2022 à 20:12, Matt Pavlovich <mattr...@gmail.com> a écrit : > >>> > >>>> +1 on bringing Karaf 5 into the Apache Karaf project. > >>>> > >>>> My $0.02 on naming is that perhaps the ‘5’ should drop off, since it’ll > >>>> have its own version number and in case w/ need a Karaf Runtime v5.x to > >>>> support all the OSGi + Jakarta + JDK changes coming. > >>>> > >>>> Regarding name ideas— I think short and simple is best! Boot, Blend, > >>>> etc. > >>>> > >>>> Perhaps whittle it down to 2 or 3 ideas? > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Matt Pavlovich > >>>> > >>>>> On Oct 6, 2022, at 8:59 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> It sounds good too ! > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards > >>>>> JB > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 3:57 PM Jamie G. <jamie.goody...@gmail.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>> Perhaps something like Apache Karaf Sustineri ? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> - The sustainably sourced modulith runtime > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 11:22 AM Serge Huber <shu...@apache.org> wrote: > >>>>>>> Thanks for the contribution JB. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Personally I think we should maybe look into having a new name for it > >>>> to > >>>>>>> make it easy to distinguish from Karaf ? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I'm especially worried if there ever is a Karaf 5 and K5 it's going to > >>>>>>> become very confusing. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I don't have great alternative solutions for the moment but maybe > >>>> something > >>>>>>> like Alembic, Cauldron, ... > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>> Serge... > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 3:38 PM Francois Papon < > >>>> francois.pa...@openobject.fr> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> May be yes, we should find a project name more not old Karaf related > >>>> to > >>>>>>>> not lost the users. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 06/10/2022 15:25, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > >>>>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I don't use Karaf5, but K5 ;) > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> And yes, the first release would be K5 1.0 (for instance, 1.1, 2.0, > >>>>>>>>> 2.1, 2.2, 3.0, etc, etc). > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Regards > >>>>>>>>> JB > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 3:12 PM Jamie G. <jamie.goody...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> Agreed that proper naming and transition/migration guides will be > >>>>>>>>>> necessary then to guide users. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> A question on the name "Karaf5" - what would its first release > >>>> version > >>>>>>>>>> be? 1.0.0? 5.0.0? > >>>>>>>>>> It may be a little awkward to search Karaf5 2.0 or Karaf5 6.0. as > >>>>>>>>>> it > >>>>>>>>>> matures/evolves. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 10:10 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > >>>> j...@nanthrax.net> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Jamie, > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Correct: we can imagine having the karaf-k4 module providing the > >>>> same > >>>>>>>>>>> support as Karaf (4): OSGi, features service, etc. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> To be honest, that's not my intention (I don't want to have K4 and > >>>> K5 > >>>>>>>>>>> coupled somehow together), but possible. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> IMHO, we will have Karaf users and K5 users, different usage. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Regards > >>>>>>>>>>> JB > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 2:21 PM Jamie G. <jamie.goody...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> To my understanding it doesn't prevent OSGi, it just does not > >>>> require > >>>>>>>>>>>> it (very much in the spirit of Karaf letting you choose what you > >>>> want > >>>>>>>>>>>> to run Equinox/Felix, Log4j/SLF4j, etc). > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> In theory can an end user take their well formed application > >>>>>>>>>>>> (features) and directly deploy them into K5 without refactoring? > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I've worked on numerous projects which started at Karaf 2, and > >>>> have > >>>>>>>>>>>> updated progressively to K3, K4. Does K5 represent a roadblock to > >>>>>>>>>>>> evolution? > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 9:36 AM Łukasz Dywicki < > >>>> l...@code-house.org> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello, > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Looking forward towards donation of it as a subproject with > >>>>>>>>>>>>> clear > >>>>>>>> name. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Tehhnically speaking it is not Karaf 5 since it is not based on > >>>>>>>> earlier principles. Dropping osgi is large change which will confuse > >>>>>>>> existing users. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hence following the ActiveMQ Artemis story we should be clear it > >>>> is > >>>>>>>> a new thing and has some things in common, but many more not inlined, > >>>> with > >>>>>>>> earlier release. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Łukasz > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Code-House > >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://code-house.org > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4 Oct 2022, at 18:35, Jean-Baptiste Onofré > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <j...@nanthrax.net> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi guys, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> As already discussed on the mailing list several times before, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I > >>>>>>>> think > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Karaf 5 (a.k.a K5) is now in a good first shape (usable). > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In a nutshell, K5 is a modulith runtime, able to launch and > >>>>>>>> co-locate > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> different kinds of modules/applications. It also provides a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> very > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> simple services programming model. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You can find documentation about K5 here: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://jbonofre.github.io/karaf5/ > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> NB: I will add the tools documentation asap. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You can find the current source code here: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/jbonofre/karaf5 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> NB: you can see the tests as kind of examples. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here's, basically my proposal I would discuss with you: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Create a dedicated repository for K5, something like > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://github.com/apache/karaf-k5 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. For issue tracker and CI/CD, I propose to use GitHub > >>>> resources > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (GitHub Issues and GitHub Actions). It's now an accepted and > >>>>>>>> possible > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> option from the Apache Software Foundation standpoint. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. For the website, I think karaf.apache.org should be just a > >>>>>>>> landing > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> page containing all "generic" topics about Apache Karaf project > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (mailing list, legal, etc) and then directed to Karaf 4 or K5, > >>>>>>>> having > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> dedicated sub websites for each. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts ? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> JB
