Hi, As a version 5 suggests a big major change I'd go for karaf 3 also. And use the current base for a 4.9 as already suggested.
Regards, Achim sent from mobile device Am 16.02.2014 08:03 schrieb "Filippo Balicchia" <[email protected]>: > For Serviecemix 5 a prefer to use karaf 3.0.* too. > For me is +1 > > Regards > > --Filippo > > > > > > 2014-02-15 23:17 GMT+01:00 Gert Vanthienen <[email protected]>: > > > L.S., > > > > > > In the "Plan for ServiceMix 5" thread, we've seen a few proposals on > > how to deal with the upgrade to Karaf 3. I think this discussion > > definitely merits a thread of its own. > > > > Personally, I would prefer to do a ServiceMix 5 release with Karaf 3 > > if possible, but I'm not sure how stable/unstable this actually is at > > the moment. The 3.0.0 release definitely had a few issues, but a lot > > of them have already been addressed and I think I even saw a 3.0.1 on > > the roadmap for the next few weeks. > > > > If this delay is all it takes to get that upgrade in ServiceMix 5, I > > think we should do that. However, we do not really know big the > > problem is. Perhaps someone could give it a go and try to figure out > > how big of an issue this upgrade is? The effort should definitely not > > be in vain, we can always commit it to another branch and start > > working on a later release there if necessary. Any volunteers? > > > > If we see it will just take a few more weeks to get everything in > > order for a Karaf 3-based release, we can always do a release > > candidate or two to show the world we're actually moving again and to > > get some feedback from the community on where we're headed - that time > > can actually come in quite handy to work on docs, for example. > > However, if the research shows that things will take too long, we > > probably have to come up with a 2.3.x-based release first anyway. > > > > > > Wdyt? > > > > Gert Vanthienen > > >
