Hi,

since I've not been aware of this rather "major" change of dropping JBI/NMR
from ServiceMix I'm fine to do a ServiceMix 5 with Karaf 2.2.3 as the big
thing that changes is internal to ServiceMix, so yes it sounds more then
reasonable to do a ServiceMix 6 with Karaf 3 :)

regards, Achim


2014-02-18 3:13 GMT+01:00 Freeman Fang <[email protected]>:

> +1 for SMX 5 with Karaf 2.3.x and SMX 6 with Karaf 3.x
>
> We better give more time for community to adopt Karaf 3.x, collect more
> feedback of Karaf 3.x in Karaf community, etc. And then SMX move to Karaf
> 3.x
> -------------
> Freeman(Yue) Fang
>
> Red Hat, Inc.
> FuseSource is now part of Red Hat
>
>
>
> On 2014-2-18, at 上午9:49, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> > Raul had one more suggestion to add to that list: doing a 4.6.0 with
> > Karaf 2.3.x and using Karaf 3.x for ServiceMix 5.  Instead of
> > resorting to a vote for something like this, I think it would be
> > better to try and build a consensus first.
> >
> > I think we should go for "SMX 5 with Karaf 2.3.x and SMX 6 with Karaf
> > 3.x", for two reasons:
> > - From a "marketing" perspective, using Karaf 2.x for ServiceMix 5 and
> > Karaf 3.x for ServiceMix 6 would give us the opportunity to signal two
> > important changes to the community: officially dropping JBI/NMR
> > support would be the highlight of ServiceMix and Karaf 3 would be the
> > highlight for ServiceMix 6.  We can probably even get the first
> > ServiceMix 5 release out next week or so, if we focus on the task at
> > hand and if all goes well.
> > - From a technical perspective, this does give us quite a bit of
> > flexibility to cater to the needs of the community by allowing us to
> > nicely do Karaf 2.3.x/2.4.x and 3.x based releases side-by-side for a
> > while, until we managed to convince everyone to switch to Karaf 3 ;).
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Gert
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 5:54 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> I think  somebody should start the vote. We have 2 options:
> >>
> >> * SMX 5 with Karaf 2.3.x and SMX 6 with Karaf 3.x
> >> * SMX 4.9 with Karaf 2.3.x and SMX 5 with Karaf 3.x
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Krzysztof
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 17.02.2014 16:59, Cristiano Costantini wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I've already repeated my position up to be annoying :-) but I repeat
> that
> >>> for me either solutions are ok
> >>> Maybe a quick vote could be the fastest and more democratic way to
> take a
> >>> decision ?s
> >>>
> >>> Could someone please summarize the available options?
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Cristiano
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 2014-02-17 16:53 GMT+01:00 Gert Vanthienen <[email protected]
> >:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi Raul,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Yeah, I think 4.9.0 is a bit of a strange version number as well.  But
> >>>> you're also right that some users will take a bit longer to move over
> >>>> to Karaf 3.   What's more: the version may not even be as temporary
> >>>> for us as we would hope, perhaps we end up doing another release in
> >>>> that series if people in the community are asking about another Karaf
> >>>> 2.x based release after this one.
> >>>>
> >>>> We do want that to be based on the current ServiceMix 5 codebase
> >>>> (without JBI/NMR) and not on the current ServiceMix 4.x codebase?
> >>>> Because the latter was the original plan and we failed to get any
> >>>> contributors to help out with that effort.
> >>>>
> >>>> I do wonder if we won't end up confusing people as well, when
> >>>> ServiceMix 4.6.0 suddenly no longer has any JBI/NMR support in there.
> >>>> We can probably communicate that though, so it might not be that big a
> >>>> problem, but we might also want to reconsider Krzysztof's proposal to
> >>>> go with 5.x for the Karaf 2.x-based assemblies without JBI/NMR (and we
> >>>> can have a few of those, using Karaf 2.3.x and 2.4.x) and use 6.x for
> >>>> the Karaf 3-based assemblies.
> >>>>
> >>
>
>


-- 

Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer &
Project Lead
OPS4J Pax for Vaadin <http://team.ops4j.org/wiki/display/PAXVAADIN/Home>
Commiter & Project Lead
blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>

Reply via email to