Hi,

1: for activiti i think the solution is would be do it at Activiti.
Like other projects like Cxf, Camel and Activemq provides their features
and module osgi compatible

2: Akka. I'm not agree to remove it cause from my point of view can be
useful in
Batch processing solution or or domain like online-gaming or finance  and
not only obviously.
Have a package ready for a service environment can be convenient.

Said That, I don't know how far It can serve in an integration platform.

3: For logging I'm fully agree with Jb

Regards

--Filippo


2014-02-21 19:47 GMT+01:00 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>:

> Hi Gert,
>
> I agree:
>
> 1/ for Activiti, ok to keep it in ServiceMix for now. The best would be to
> do it at Activiti.
> 2/ ok to remove akka.
> 3/ for logging, we can keep it in ServiceMix for now.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On 02/21/2014 06:02 PM, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>
>> L.S.,
>>
>>
>> As suggested by a lot of people over the past week , we should focus
>> on the core assembly before anything else.  If we look at the current
>> ServiceMix 5 project layout, that would mean we have 3 non-core bits
>> in there that we would need to think about.
>>
>> The first one is the "activiti" module.  This seems to be a pretty
>> good match for our core technology set.  So I would suggest we keep
>> that around for now, once it moves to a Karaf subproject or (even
>> better) to the Activiti project itself, we can just reuse that effort
>> and remove our bits.
>>
>> The two things we do may want to remove are the "akka" and "logging"
>> modules.
>>
>> The "akka" bits are a personal experiment of mine and I'm not sure
>> anyone is using that at all. Also, that technology is probably a bit
>> alien to a lot of people in the community, so it probably makes no
>> sense keeping it around.  I would propose we just remove that
>> entirely.
>>
>> For "logging": I doubt a lot of people are using that as well.  I was
>> first thinking of adding a demo using Camel Pax-Logging instead, but
>> that seems a bit harder than I expected.  Regardless, this is another
>> module where we should ask ourselves whether we want to keep it around
>> (for now) or not.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Gert Vanthienen
>>
>>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> [email protected]
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>

Reply via email to