Le mer. 18 janv. 2023 à 19:43, Andrea Cosentino <anco...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> Hello, > > The point is just one in relation to OSGi metadata. The components will be > consumed, also, by runtimes that don't need OSGi metadata, so why all the > components should be with OSGi metadata and packaged as bundles? > I'm maybe a bit dumb but why all the work and meta for quarkus and spring boot if the reasoning is right? I perfectly understand spring or quarkus have their own programming model/runtime so need specific code and meta but then how is OSGi different? A simple example is that you should be able to drop most jandex indices if your statement is true. > > I don't see the reason why. At least the OSGi metadata should be generated > under camel Karaf project, instead of being part of the core components > I think the exact opposite since handling metadata in a 3rd always got proven not working very well for end user. SMix did a bunch of forks for that reason - which was enabling users but also a big constrait since users were not able to use the actual binaries for ex. Having metada on the fly is a neat solution but does not work very long, even when you have a bunch of people to maintain is - graalvm metadata repository is poorly usable for that reason today so for the camel ecosystem it sounds impossible to do with a good quality and being able to say "next release" at each release for end users is just not an option - but what it would mean concretely to not handle it in camel. > > I see there is a veto about moving to apache Karaf. It was already a mess > before to maintain the features and release camel-karaf with Camel 3, in > the end there were one contributor (myself) taking care of them, with some > sporadic help. I really don't have the capacity in the future. > Guess it joins my previous point and actually justifies it should be in camel project or not at the end since it looks like the status of the camel-osgi ecosystem as of today - inter projects. > > If the situation is this, as Camel PMC we'll need to discuss this and > eventually discontinue, deprecating or make the camel-karaf releases > optional. > +1 if there is no real ownership, better to go to attic than have a not living project IMHO > > Thanks. > > > > Il mer 18 gen 2023, 19:27 Matt Pavlovich <mattr...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > > > I have a similar question on this point-- > > > > > On Jan 18, 2023, at 12:02 PM, Łukasz Dywicki <l...@code-house.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > 6) I do not see any sign of what is going to happen with OSGi metadata > > which is present for Apache Camel 3.x components. Is Camel 4.x going to > > retain OSGi metadata? > > > > How is maintaining OGSI metadata in Camel a concern? > > > > Thanks, > > Matt Pavlovich >
