It sounds good. We have to be careful with the communication :)
Regards
JB
On 07/22/2011 02:51 PM, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
L.S.,
Well, if we make the default kit have the nmr/jbi as optional
features, then I think it would be better to do the same for the -full
kit. The biggest change is actually in the default download there, so
I do agree we have to make to communicate things properly to our user
base so they know what to expect.
I'm not sure we have to skip a version to make that point clear though
- it would be the same message, regardless of whether we release the
next 4.x.0 as 4.4.0 or 4.5.0. Personally, I think we'd better focus
on getting the message across properly instead of adding to the
confusion ourselves by skipping a version number.
Regards,
Gert Vanthienen
------------------------
FuseSource
Web: http://fusesource.com
Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Gert,
As far as I understood, we agreed that SMX4 should keep the JBI
compatibility. JBI will be completely removed in SMX5.
I'm fully agree to set the JBI feature should be as optional. In that case,
we should send a clear and strong sign to the community. Why not release SMX
4.5 for the new version (in place of 4.4.0) ?
My only concern is just to avoid to loose the users. I think that users
expect something close to 4.3.0 in 4.4.0.
If we announce SMX 4.5 with the new distribution, it would be more clear for
the users.
My 0.02€
Regards
JB
On 07/22/2011 02:26 PM, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
Jean-Baptiste,
For the -full assembly, I think it would make sense to take the basic
assembly and just add all bundles in the system repository instead of
starting with the -jbi assembly. If we're recommending new users to
go for Camel/ActiveMQ/CXF instead of JBI, we should not install the
NMR/JBI features by default in this assembly either - if we just leave
them as optional features and have everything sitting in the system
repository already, enabling them would just be a few commands away if
people wanted to.
Regards,
Gert Vanthienen
------------------------
FuseSource
Web: http://fusesource.com
Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:18 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré<[email protected]>
wrote:
Hi Gert,
I'm agree that ServiceMix is premium pre-packaged container for
ActiveMQ/Camel/CXF. I'm also agree with the usage of SMX without internet
connection.
Waiting for Karaf profiles (that should be included in Karaf 3.0.0), we
can
provide the following ServiceMix distribution:
- apache-servicemix-4.4.0 which is Karaf + ActiveMQ + CXF + Camel,
pre-packaged/pre-configured with a warranty of the integration of these
projects. The nmr/jbi features will be available as optional.
- apache-servicemix-4.4.0-nmr which is the previous distribution but nmr
feature is installed by default, and as a bootFeatures. The jbi feature
is
still an optional one.
- apache-servicemix-4.4.0-full is the previous distribution but the
system
repo contains all artifacts required to work offline.
WDYT Gert ?
Regards
JB
On 07/20/2011 05:16 PM, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
L.S.,
Looking at mails on the user mailing lists and going by my own
production project experience, I'm seeing two use cases for ServiceMix
where we could support our user base by providing new packaging
options for Apache ServiceMix.
1). A lot of our users seem to be using only Camel/ActiveMQ (and
perhaps CXF) on their Karaf runtimes. Many people don't have a use
case for JBI/NMR and then decide to just create the container they are
looking for by adding things on top of Karaf directly. I think it
would be a good idea to add a apache-servicemix-4.x.0-minimal
distribution which only packages and installs these basic bundles and
leaves everything else there as optional features. Given that we are
recommending the use of Camel/ActiveMQ/CXF over JBI/NMR ourselves a
lot, we should really have our distribution represent that
recommendation. Over time, we might even consider making this the
default download and renaming the existing one to
apache-servicemix-4.x.0-jbi instead or something.
2). Another question we occasionally see on the mailing lists is from
users that are running ServiceMix on machines that don't have internet
access and that are having a hard time installing optional features.
In order to cater for that need, we could add an
apache-servicemix-4.x.0-full distribution that contains bundles for
all the features we ship with, regardless of whether they're installed
by default or not. A quick test shows that it would become over 200
MB in size, which might make the release process a bit heavy, but one
other hand: there's definitely a user base for this kind of convenient
all-in-one download as well.
What do people think about adding these two packaging options?
Regards,
Gert Vanthienen
------------------------
FuseSource
Web: http://fusesource.com
Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[email protected]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[email protected]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[email protected]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
