L.S.,

This thread is beginning to get a big long, with lots of different
proposals being discussed at the same time (upgrade to Karaf 3,
migration to git, plans for ServiceMix 6. ...)  - perhaps we should
split things up in a few separate threads. One of the first choices we
have to make, is whether or not to got with Karaf 3.  I'll start a
separate thread about that first bit in a few minutes.  Feel free to
start extra threads about any other stuff you're thinking about or
would like to see.


Regards,

Gert Vanthienen


On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
<[email protected]> wrote:
> We don't need to wait until the migration is finished. It can be done
> parallel together with renaming of the repository. The vote for the both
> tasks can be started. We only need to create a new branch for SXM5, (e.g.
> servicemix-5.x) in the current repository and start the SMX 6 code base in
> trunk from the beginning).
>
>
> On 15.02.2014 14:08, Raul Kripalani wrote:
>>
>> It's great to see all this activity again on the SMX mailing list -
>> woohoo!
>>
>> In my opinion, Git migration should not hold us back, nor block this great
>> momentum!
>>
>> All we need immediately is a way to collaborate and send in traceable pull
>> requests to the community - there's already a GitHub mirror [1], trunk
>> branch.
>>
>> Yes, committers won't be able to apply pull requests directly, but they
>> can
>> take the patch and apply it on SVN in the meantime. Less than ideal, but
>> better than waiting.
>>
>> Personally, I've reserved the day tomorrow to hack into SMX5; if you feel
>> like joining and discussing, I'll be in the IRC channel.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/apache/servicemix5
>>
>> *Raúl Kripalani*
>> Apache Camel PMC Member & Committer | Enterprise Architect, Open Source
>> Integration specialist
>> http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
>> http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> For me it is ok, we miss nothing. But I have no right yet to decide ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>> On 15.02.2014 13:44, Cristiano Costantini wrote:
>>>
>>>> Anyhow, for me in the end it is the same,
>>>> What is it missing now to start?
>>>>
>>>> Should we make a vote about migration to git?
>>>>
>>>> Il sabato 15 febbraio 2014, Krzysztof Sobkowiak <
>>>> [email protected]>
>>>> ha scritto:
>>>>
>>>>   I'm not sure if we should change the version to 4.9.0-SNAPSHOT but it
>>>>>
>>>>> would be an option for the solution proposed by Jean-Baptiste: 4.9.x
>>>>> with
>>>>> Karaf 2.3.x and 5.x with Karaf 3.x instead of 5.x with Karaf 2.3.x and
>>>>> 6.x
>>>>> with Karaf 3.x. The both ideas have advantages and disadvantages. I
>>>>> think
>>>>> here starts again a discussion about semantic versioning.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think we should create a new repository for ServiceMix. I
>>>>> propose
>>>>> to rename the current servicemix5 repository in servicemix or
>>>>> servicemix-assembly and make a branch for ServiceMix 5 (or 4.9 as
>>>>> proposed
>>>>> by Cristiano). The development of ServiceMix 6 (or 5 as proposed by
>>>>> Cristiano) could start in master branch - 1 repository,  1 branch for
>>>>> the
>>>>> major release (like in Karaf)
>>>>>
>>>>> We could eventually fully migrate to git development (without svn like
>>>>> Karaf) with this repository.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 15.02.2014 12:02, Cristiano Costantini wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>   I try to summarize. If I'm wrong pleas correct me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    Good summary and I agree with you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's true that a ServiceMix based on Karaf 3.0.0 may need some more
>>>>>> testing, so it would be good to release a new ServiceMix based on
>>>>>> Karaf
>>>>>> 2.3.3 asap, but already without NMR and JBI.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    The plan (at least one of the possible scenarios) for the Karaf 3.x
>>>>>> line
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> of SMX was to completely remove the code base of SMX and start again
>>>>>>> with a
>>>>>>> new custom  Karaf 3.x distribution which only assembles the Camel,
>>>>>>> ActiveMQ, CXF features
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   I think we should do that: let's create a new repository (move to
>>>>>>
>>>>>> GIT?)
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> start assembling the new ServiceMix based on Karaf 3.0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because SMX 5 is almost stable, it would be wrong idea to remove its
>>>>>> code
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   base and start SMX5 from the scratch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    My proposal is to change the version to 4.9.0-SNAPSHOT (so it
>>>>>>> address
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> also
>>>>>> concerns like those of Raul about the minor/major versions upgrade)
>>>>>> then
>>>>>> remove the other dependencies from it leaving it to be only a Karaf
>>>>>> 2.3.3
>>>>>> plus Camel, CXF and AcvtiveMQ, and release it as soon as possible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the jump in version from 4.5.x to 4.9.x should alert user that it is a
>>>>>> transitory release that lead to ServiceMix 5.0 that it is Karaf 3.0.0
>>>>>> based.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My 2 cents :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cristiano
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   --
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>
>
>
> --
> 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

Reply via email to