Hi
Just though I wanted to do a status update on those initial tasks we
set out to do.
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
> Hi
>
> So Camel 2.17 was the last release supporting Java 1.7.
> The next Camel 2.18 is requiring Java 1.8.
>
> Here is some thoughts of mine about this r
Hi
Just an update on some of these tasks lined
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
> Hi
>
> So Camel 2.17 was the last release supporting Java 1.7.
> The next Camel 2.18 is requiring Java 1.8.
>
> Here is some thoughts of mine about this release up for discussion.
>
>
>
> a)
> I
On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Gnanaguru S wrote:
>
> Guys,
>
> These are some of the feature, I wish to see in upcoming camel versions. It
> would be useful to have.
>
> 1. Timeout option in a internal synchronous endpoint - we very much use
> camel for orchestration layer. In a use case where
Hi
The migration of the docs is already started with the components. We
are migrating them one by one which takes a rather long time to get
all done, but we do have a good start already.
Thee is docs in the src/doc folder of the components that has been
migrated, such as
https://github.com/apache
Johan-
I'm a big fan of long winded statements as well, but not following this
one =)
Are you suggesting the current core architecture is problematic or that
a conversion to something like reactive would result in "strange" bugs?
Thanks,
Matt
On 4/4/16 10:52 AM, Johan Edstrom wrote:
I thi
On 4/4/16 11:12 AM, Raul Kripalani wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Matt Pavlovich wrote:
The current website looks the same as it did when it was created:
https://web.archive.org/web/20070701184530/http://activemq.apache.org/camel/
I thought the Karaf guys did a nice job on the web
On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Matt Pavlovich wrote:
> The current website looks the same as it did when it was created:
>>
>> https://web.archive.org/web/20070701184530/http://activemq.apache.org/camel/
>>
> I thought the Karaf guys did a nice job on the website re-work. Is there a
> new base f
I think the core should focus on speed, consistency, reliability
and last extensibility; Camel has a nice traction but we don’t
want to see “strange” bugs from new features if that makes
sense as a long windy sentence…..
> On Apr 4, 2016, at 9:36 AM, Matt Pavlovich wrote:
>
>
>
> On 3/24/16
On 3/23/16 5:07 AM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
j)
Split camel-cxf into modules so we can separate WS and RS and also
spring vs blueprint. Today its big ball of dependencies that is a bit
hard to slice and dice. Specially for MSA style with REST and you dont
want to add in a bunch of extra not needed JARs
On 3/24/16 3:27 PM, Raul Kripalani wrote:
On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak <
krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> wrote:
I think, the way to Camel 3 should also include the renovation of the Core
(if really necessary) or even rewriting and
making it more asynchronous, e.g. using rx.
On 3/24/16 3:55 PM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 6:24 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
wrote:
Hi
I'm not sure how the Camel Core actually looks like (especially the quality and
the ability to refactor or make more
complicated changes) but I had occasion to talk with some people using Cam
Jakub-
Sign me up to help with this.
-Matt
On 3/23/16 9:22 AM, jkorab wrote:
Claus Ibsen-2 wrote
PS: We surely also need a better "what is Camel" story on the front
page. Its still that very first one with all the tech jumble that was
initially created.
I would be happy to write something up
On 01.04.2016 16:01, Quinn Stevenson wrote:
One clarification on the bnd-maven-plugin configuration - it will inherit
configuration from parent bnd.bnd files, so we can have the common
configuration we want in the top-level directory, and only override it when
needed.
Also - there are some “i
On 01.04.2016 09:17, Claus Ibsen wrote:
Hi
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 5:06 PM, Christian Schneider
wrote:
I recently worked on some projects that also need OSGi settings and found an
interesting thing.
It seems the easiest way to get the exports, imports and other OSGi settings
right is not to us
Yeah sure we love contributions.
Awesome - I create a 'Wish' issue on JIRA (CAMEL-9799) to be transparency.
There are two implementations mentioned on JSON Schema [1],
'json-schema-validator' [2] which is created by (one of) the authors of
JSON Schema and 'json-schema' [3].
Both seems to be
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Andreas Gebhardt
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>> 7. JSON validator. XML XSD validation is nice and straight forward, but
>>> it
>>> will be great if we have something similar for JSON as well. like
>>> to:json-validator:classpath/response.json
>>>
>>
>> Yep, we should create a
Hi,
7. JSON validator. XML XSD validation is nice and straight forward, but it
will be great if we have something similar for JSON as well. like
to:json-validator:classpath/response.json
Yep, we should create a component for JSON Schema validations.
I would like to contribute to this (new)
I’d suggest replacing the obsolete Import-Service and Export-Service with
actually useful Require-Capability and Provide-Capability headers.
david jencks
> On Apr 1, 2016, at 7:01 AM, Quinn Stevenson
> wrote:
>
> One clarification on the bnd-maven-plugin configuration - it will inherit
> con
One clarification on the bnd-maven-plugin configuration - it will inherit
configuration from parent bnd.bnd files, so we can have the common
configuration we want in the top-level directory, and only override it when
needed.
Also - there are some “information only” headers in put in the MANIFES
Hi
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 5:06 PM, Christian Schneider
wrote:
> I recently worked on some projects that also need OSGi settings and found an
> interesting thing.
> It seems the easiest way to get the exports, imports and other OSGi settings
> right is not to use central defaults and instead do a
I recently worked on some projects that also need OSGi settings and
found an interesting thing.
It seems the easiest way to get the exports, imports and other OSGi
settings right is not to use central defaults and instead do all
settings per project while relying on defaults as much as possible.
Hi guys
I have some stuff ready around Karaf 4 and OSGI 5/6 support.
I will share asap.
RegardsJB
Original message
From: Antoine Toulme
Date: 29/03/2016 08:36 (GMT+01:00)
To: dev@camel.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] - Thoughts on Apache Camel 2.18 and towards
> On Mar 25, 2016, at 10:42 PM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
>
> Hi Antoine
>
> Yay sounds good. What do you fancy working with?
>
> We got stuff around OSGi such as
>
> - upgrading the tests to be karaf 4.x based
> - drop karaf 2.x
> - upgrade to OSGi 5.0
Looks like Raul is on top of it. I have some O
Hi
There was a comment on my blog about the Camel logo
Hey Claus; The OpenTSDB project (http://opentsdb.net/) ran an icon
design contest on 99designs. People submit designs and others vote.
It's a cool system and I imagine you would get a lot of
submissions
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:07 A
Hi Antoine
Yay sounds good. What do you fancy working with?
We got stuff around OSGi such as
- upgrading the tests to be karaf 4.x based
- drop karaf 2.x
- upgrade to OSGi 5.0
Some easier ones would be in the platforms/karaf/features to make
karaf 4 the default being used in the validation, cur
I’d like to help for this release. Looks like you got a good laundry list
already. Where can I help best in that list?
> On Mar 23, 2016, at 3:07 AM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> So Camel 2.17 was the last release supporting Java 1.7.
> The next Camel 2.18 is requiring Java 1.8.
>
> Here is
Hey Guru,
Nice ideas! Some thoughts inline.
Cheers,
Raúl.
On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Gnanaguru S wrote:
>
> Guys,
>
> These are some of the feature, I wish to see in upcoming camel versions. It
> would be useful to have.
>
> 1. Timeout option in a internal synchronous endpoint - we very
On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 8:55 PM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
> There has been a camel-rx component for several years now, but nobody
> has shown interest in it. Nor is people screaming in this community
> about reactive libraries. In fact people rely on Camel being "not in
> the forefront"
>
A camel-rx c
On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 6:24 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'm not sure how the Camel Core actually looks like (especially the quality
> and the ability to refactor or make more
> complicated changes) but I had occasion to talk with some people using Camel
> and trying to fix some issu
On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak <
krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think, the way to Camel 3 should also include the renovation of the Core
> (if really necessary) or even rewriting and
> making it more asynchronous, e.g. using rx.java (the later can be
> eventually part
Hi
I'm not sure how the Camel Core actually looks like (especially the quality and
the ability to refactor or make more
complicated changes) but I had occasion to talk with some people using Camel
and trying to fix some issues (and
even saw some discussion in net about the state of Core) who thi
On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Quinn Stevenson
wrote:
> I’d be happy to take a shot at the conversion. Is there an appropriate JIRA
> created already? Or should I continue what you started on the osgi-trouble
> branch?
>
I suggest to start a new branch. The osgi-trouble branch includes
anot
I’d be happy to take a shot at the conversion. Is there an appropriate JIRA
created already? Or should I continue what you started on the osgi-trouble
branch?
> On Mar 24, 2016, at 8:37 AM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Thanks for sharing the details about the bnd maven plugin. Sounds
> pro
Hi
Thanks for sharing the details about the bnd maven plugin. Sounds
promising if its more active maintained and is better.
Anyone is surely welcome to give it a go on the Camel master branch.
The build system is a bit complicated as there is some default stuff
in parent pom.xml and some ant magi
Antonin/Claus -
I’ve used the bnd-maven-plugin, and it dramatically reduced the amount of
configuration I had to do for my bundles. I hit a bug in maven-bundle-plugin
(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5179) and moving to the
bnd-maven-plugin allowed me to what I needed to do. I eve
Guys,
These are some of the feature, I wish to see in upcoming camel versions. It
would be useful to have.
1. Timeout option in a internal synchronous endpoint - we very much use
camel for orchestration layer. In a use case where many downstream
routes/endpoints are called synchronously, I wou
For the docs part, we are at almost half of the components in this moment.
I hope we can finish them soon.
--
Andrea Cosentino
--
Apache Camel PMC Member
Apache Karaf Committer
Apache Servicemix Committer
Email: ancosen1...@yahoo.com
Twitter: @oscerd2
Github: osce
Hi Claus,
Just in case for info, there is apparently a new BND Maven plugin [1] that is
supposed to alleviate some of the issues encountered with maven-bundle-plugin.
I haven’t tried it (nor am knowledgeable in the area) but that may be good to
know at some point for that piece of work.
[1]: h
Hi
m)
Upgrade OSGi
We are using osgi 4.3.1 version which whatever OSGi version that is.
But there is a OSGi 5.0 that newer Karaf containers uses.
But the big pain is upgrading maven-bundle-plugin. We are currently
using an old 2.3.7. But the newer versions have their new sets of
problems / fixes
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 3:22 PM, jkorab wrote:
> Claus Ibsen-2 wrote
>> PS: We surely also need a better "what is Camel" story on the front
>> page. Its still that very first one with all the tech jumble that was
>> initially created.
>
> I would be happy to write something up around this. I have
Claus Ibsen-2 wrote
> PS: We surely also need a better "what is Camel" story on the front
> page. Its still that very first one with all the tech jumble that was
> initially created.
I would be happy to write something up around this. I have some experience
in explaining Camel to people :)
Jakub
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 1:43 PM, Deven Phillips
wrote:
> For the logo, I think that my wife (a graphic artist) might be looking for
> just that kind of challenge... I will let you know once I discuss it with
> her.
>
Yeah sounds great. Would be great to have professionals sketch logos,
so we have
For the logo, I think that my wife (a graphic artist) might be looking for
just that kind of challenge... I will let you know once I discuss it with
her.
I assume that she will need to submit an ICLA for the work?
Deven
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 6:07 AM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
> Hi
>
> So Camel 2.17
43 matches
Mail list logo
