sounds good to me too

On 4 February 2013 10:21, Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]> wrote:

> Yeah, that sounds like a good plan to me, +1
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Gert Vanthienen
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > Guillaume,
> >
> >
> > Bundles and specs are usually released separately these days and they
> have
> > a completely different release cycle than the container, so I would keep
> > those as they are today.
> >
> > I was mainly thinking about Features itself and the things we usually
> > release together with that (Utils, Components, NMR, Archetypes).  If we
> > could strip that down to a single maven build for the container itself
> and
> > drop the JBI/NMR bits, we should be able to do those container builds
> more
> > quickly and easily, making it easier to stay up-to-date with all other
> > dependency versions (Karaf, Camel, CXF, ...)
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Gert Vanthienen
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Are you also talking about moving back everything in a single
> subproject
> > ?
> > > So that the release would only consist in a single maven release ?
> > > If so, I'm not sure we can easily do that for bundles (which are used
> by
> > > downstream projects), and also the specs (which are used by Karaf).
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 9:54 PM, Gert Vanthienen
> > > <[email protected]>wrote:
> > >
> > > > L.S.,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > About a year and a half ago, we had some discussions on the mailing
> > list
> > > > about a plan for Apache ServiceMix 5.0 and had some initial commits
> to
> > > > build the additional services and functionality.  Since then however,
> > > none
> > > > of us have actually had the time to work on that code or move things
> > > > forward.
> > > >
> > > > In the meanwhile, we are also struggling constantly to get our
> releases
> > > > done in timely fashion.  The latest 4.5.0 release took almost 9
> months
> > > > since the first mention of it on the dev@ list.  Doing a ServiceMix
> > > > release
> > > > now is quite a task: it usually involves doing releases in 5 or 6
> > > > subprojects.
> > > >
> > > > I would like to propose a new plan for Apache ServiceMix 5.0.
>  Instead
> > of
> > > > doing a lot of new development, how about we start with the current
> 4.x
> > > > features codebase and remove everything that's related to JBI and the
> > > NMR.
> > > >  That will give us a nice and simple integration container build
> (based
> > > on
> > > > Karaf, Camel, CXF, ActiveMQ, ...) and everything is living in a
> single
> > > > project that's quick and easy to release.
> > > >
> > > > If we start doing this now, we could get a build out with Karaf
> 2.3.0,
> > > > ActiveMQ 5.8.0, Camel 2.11.0 (which will bring in Scala 2.10 and
> opens
> > up
> > > > the possibility to include the Akka OSGi examples I built a few
> months
> > > ago)
> > > > pretty soon after those versions are available.   With only one
> project
> > > to
> > > > maintain the versions of all those dependencies, we should be able to
> > > > follow up more regularly as our sibling projects do (new) fix
> releases
> > as
> > > > well.
> > > >
> > > > We don't have to throw away the existing ServiceMix 5.0 code by the
> > way,
> > > we
> > > > can always move that into a separate branch and then cherry-pick the
> > > useful
> > > > bits afterwards, but I think our first goal now should be to get
> > > ourselves
> > > > in a position that we can actually build and release stuff more
> easily
> > > > again.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Wdyt?
> > > >
> > > > Gert Vanthienen
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > ------------------------
> > > Guillaume Nodet
> > > ------------------------
> > > Red Hat, Open Source Integration
> > >
> > > Email: [email protected]
> > > Web: http://fusesource.com
> > > Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> ------------------------
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Red Hat, Open Source Integration
>
> Email: [email protected]
> Web: http://fusesource.com
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>

Reply via email to