Micheal,

I am working towards 1.3.8 release. We cannot bring the extension activity
feature on 1.3.x branch

On Nov 24, 2017 15:46, "Michael Hahn" <mhahn....@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Sathwik,
>
> thanks for the pointers.
>
> I've seen on GitHub that you are currently working on the "ode-1.3.x"
> branch.
> Should I also do the porting based on that branch or better on the master?
>
> Regards,
> Michael
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Sathwik B P [mailto:sathwik...@gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 23. November 2017 14:52
> An: dev@ode.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: Extension activities
>
> Hi Hahn,
>
> Good to hear about your interest on porting Extension activities onto the
> trunk. It only exists in APACHE_ODE_2.X-experimental" branch.
>
> I suppose these should be the initial commits from Tammo, [ODE-159,
> ODE-160]
> https://github.com/apache/ode/commit/5ef69232cc6f19cf2818dd1b110416
> b959297126
> https://github.com/apache/ode/commit/1d5fa185a77c944e8d4a708b451611
> fa74d5c2dc
>
> You can just go up the commits if there are more.
>
>
> regards,
> sathwik
>
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Michael Hahn <mhahn....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm actually very interested in the support of BPEL extension
> > activities in ODE and also willing to help to integrate/build the
> > feature :-) Some years ago I was able to successfully port the
> > extension activity support from the "APACHE_ODE_2.X-experimental"
> > branch into an ODE 1.3.4 release.
> >
> > So, if someone can give me a pointer where to find the most recent
> > version of the extension activity related classes, I can integrate the
> > feature into the current trunk and provide the result as a pull
> > request. Else I can also simply go with the version in the
> > "APACHE_ODE_2.X-experimental" branch as a starting point.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Michael
> >
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Sathwik B P [mailto:sath...@apache.org]
> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 18. Oktober 2017 15:53
> > An: dev@ode.apache.org
> > Betreff: Re: Extension activities
> >
> > Hi Oliver,
> >
> > ODE 2.0 branch was an experimental branch and is not maintained since
> > a very long time. I will have to revisit it myself, in case it
> > involves changes to the ODE object model, then we cannot bring it on
> > any of 1.3.x releases because of chances of breaking binary
> compatibilities.
> >
> > In order to make new features available, we moved towards JSON based
> > state serialization away from JAVA serialization in the trunk which is
> > in 1.4 release.
> >
> > Currently, we are seeking new committers, you might want to discuss
> > the feature that you are willing to contribute and probably help us
> build it.
> >
> > regards,
> > sathwik
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Oliver Kopp <kopp....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > In the context of our usage, we rely on BPEL extension activity
> > > support within ODE for enabling the invocation of REST APIs through
> > > a corresponding extension bundle. We therefore ported the extension
> > > activity support from the 2.0-alpha branch (already some years ago
> > > and therefore not up to date with "latest" version on GitHub) into
> > > the current 1.3.7 release build which works. The problem is that by
> > > changing the source code of the official ODE 1.3.7 release, we have
> > > to ship our extended version of ODE and take over responsibilities
> > > regarding licenses, etc. Therefore, it would be really nice if there
> > > will be an ODE 1.3.x release with integrated extension activity
> > > support, so that we can use/refer to ODE as it is and as a result
> > > treat it as a ready to use open source middleware such as Tomcat, we
> > > just use within our ecosystem.
> > >
> > > Do you see any chance to release a corresponding distribution that
> > > contains extension activity support in the near future?
> > >
> > > In return we are really interested in open sourcing our BPEL4REST
> > > extension bundle so that it can be shipped as a feature with ODE!
> > > 👨‍🔧
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Oliver
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Reply via email to