Good morning gentlemen,
Depending of the timeline, I would propose (and prefer ;)):
- ServiceMix 5 using Karaf 2.3.4 (in vote today)
- ServiceMix 6 using Karaf 3.0.1 or 3.0.2 (that will be stable)
Especially, using Karaf 3.0.1, we have some overlap that I would like to
cleanup. For instance, it would be possible to remove ServiceMix Naming
and replace with Karaf JNDI instead (which provide a JNDI Context now).
So, to avoid to postpone SMX 5 too far, I would release with Karaf
stable branch (2.3.x), and prepare SMX6 with Karaf 3.0.x.
Moreover, we don't have a lot of feedback/update from the other projects
(Camel, CXF, ActiveMQ, ...) with Karaf 3.0.x.
Regards
JB
On 02/14/2014 11:01 AM, Achim Nierbeck wrote:
+1, especially for using Karaf 3.0.1 with Servicemix 5,
Karaf 3.0.1 because we already identified some rather nasty bugs with Karaf
that shouldn't spoil a ServiceMix 5 ;)
regards, Achim
2014-02-14 10:55 GMT+01:00 Cristiano Costantini <
[email protected]>:
My opinion:
Servicemix 5.0.0 -> Karaf 3.0.0
then branch and Servicemix 4.9.0 -> latest Karaf 2.3.x
this because jumping from 2.2.11 to 3.0.0 may be a big step and it's good
to have something in between
and I would assign this the version number 4.9 to mark it is still big step
that discontinues from the previous versions, and something that leads to
the next big revision
(I remember that firefox did something like this from version 3.1 to 3.5 so
to mark the big changes even if not upgrading to major version, this before
startying to release a new version every 6 weeks :-) )
2014-02-14 10:14 GMT+01:00 Krzysztof Sobkowiak <[email protected]
:
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
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[email protected]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
