I've not understood clearly, you would base SMX5 on Karaf 2.3.3 and SMX6 on Karaf 3.0.0 ?
I prefer to align major version upgrades to those of Karaf, so SMX 4.x on Karaf 2.x and SMX 5 on Karaf 3,but any of the two is good for me. 2014-02-14 11:06 GMT+01:00 Krzysztof Sobkowiak <[email protected]>: > I prefer the solution with restart of the ServiceMix code base and build > it from scratch based on Karaf 3.x (we could use the new plugins and the > new configuration files from Karaf). But I saw the current version of > ServiceMix 5 has been updated to the newest version of Karaf 2.3.x and the > problems I had when I was trying to perform the upgrade to 2.3.3 was only > caused by the sclala library. > > I haven't fully tested ServiceMix 5, but the samples I have tested make no > problems. When ServiceMix 5 is almost stable perhaps we could fix the > existing issues and release it in this form (based on Karaf 2.3.x, probably > upgraded later to Karaf 2.4.x) and start ServiceMix 6 from scratch based on > Karaf 3.x and Karaf features. I think people have made some good work to > make ServiceMix5 and perhaps we shouldn't send it into /dev/null :) What do > you think about this? > > Regards > Krzysztof > > > > On 14.02.2014 10:33, Gert Vanthienen wrote: > >> Hi Krzystof, >> >> >> Up to now, the codebase is using Karaf 2.3.x, but there's nothing >> preventing us from upgrading. If we're going for a new start, we >> might as well start with the latest and greatest, I think. Would you >> fancy taking a stab at that upgrade? >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Gert Vanthienen >> >> >> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi >>> >>> Due to the training for my company I couldn't follow the whole discussion >>> about future of ServiceMix5. Are we going to upgrade it to Karaf 3.x or >>> will >>> it be released on basis of Karaf 2.x? >>> >>> Regards >>> Krzysztof >>> >>> >>> On 13.02.2014 09:53, Gert Vanthienen wrote: >>> >>>> L.S., >>>> >>>> >>>> Moving the discussion from the users@ to dev@ mailing list, it would >>>> be good to figure out how to go about things. >>>> >>>> For now, I would propose we avoid adding any extra complexity and just >>>> focus on getting a simple assembly project in place that combines the >>>> latest and greatest bits of ActiveMQ, CXF, Camel, Karaf, ... >>>> >>>> How about we start with the ServiceMix 5 codebase, remove the new >>>> Camel interceptor bits for now and just focus on getting the assembly >>>> itself, the examples and the integration tests working? That way, we >>>> should have a fairly manageable amount of work to perform before we >>>> can get to a new release. >>>> >>>> We have a board report coming up in March, so we can convey this new >>>> direction in that. Perhaps we should use the next board report after >>>> that as a checkpoint to see if we are making any progress: by then, I >>>> think we should have been able to do at least one or two releases and >>>> we should have found a few people that are willing/able to help out >>>> with the work. If we have not made any progress on the community >>>> aspect by then, it may be a good time to reflect on how to gracefully >>>> move people over to a plain Karaf/CXF/Camel/... solution instead. >>>> >>>> >>>> Wdyt? >>>> >>>> Gert Vanthienen >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Krzysztof Sobkowiak >>> >>> JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini >>> Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center >>> <http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw >>> e-mail: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> | >>> Twitter: @KSobkowiak >>> >> > > -- > Krzysztof Sobkowiak > > JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini > Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center < > http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw > e-mail: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> | > Twitter: @KSobkowiak >
