Even if I understand the karaf position I completely agree about Claus's
remark to also have Spring 3.1 for Camel and others projects.
What I would like to propose is that we create for Karaf/ServiceMix
projects a page containing a table of the different software used and have
a roadmap about them
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
> On Oct 8, 2012, at 1:08 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>
>> Agree Claus, but Camel is not the only application running on Karaf.
>>
>> So, we have to think about "others projects" as well.
>>
>> I have no problem to upgrade to Spring 3.1.x b
Hi Heath,
That's odd, because I've seen that problem with the features v. 1.2.0 before
and the binary download fixed it.
My next step would be to move my .m2/repository aside, do a clean build and see
if that fixes it (it should). If it does, replace the elements of the old
repository with th
Hi Brian,
This was the binary built from the latest code on trunk (built this evening).
On Oct 8, 2012, at 7:14 PM, Brian Topping wrote:
> When was the last time you updated your binary? It seems like recent
> versions update system service jars from the repository more often, and I've
> see
When was the last time you updated your binary? It seems like recent versions
update system service jars from the repository more often, and I've seen that
cause these kinds of issues. Downloading the latest build from
https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots-group/org/apache/kar
Is this expected behavoir? In Karaf 3.0, I am deleting the data directory and
on start up I am receiving the error below in the log files. I would not
expect to get an IllegalArguementException after deleting the data directory
and restarting.
Can someone speak to whether or not this is exp
On Oct 8, 2012, at 1:08 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Agree Claus, but Camel is not the only application running on Karaf.
>
> So, we have to think about "others projects" as well.
>
> I have no problem to upgrade to Spring 3.1.x but later (why not imagine a
> Karaf 2.4.x for that, it cou
Agree Claus, but Camel is not the only application running on Karaf.
So, we have to think about "others projects" as well.
I have no problem to upgrade to Spring 3.1.x but later (why not imagine
a Karaf 2.4.x for that, it could be a good indicator), and propose both
Spring 3.0 and 3.1 in Karaf
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Camel 2.10.x uses Spring 3.0.7 for now, for we are "aligned" with Camel
> 2.10.
>
> Does it make sense to update to Spring 3.1.x (for future Camel version
> maybe) ?
>
Well Camel 2.10 supports both Spring 3.0.x and 3.1.x. And we are
fr
Can we do an update to Spring 3.1.x later on with the 2.3.x branch or
would it be too disruptive?
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Camel 2.10.x uses Spring 3.0.7 for now, for we are "aligned" with Camel
> 2.10.
>
> Does it make sense to update to Spring 3.1.x (for fut
Why not adding spring/3.1 "optional" feature in Karaf 2.3.0 but let
spring 3.0.7 as "default" spring feature ?
I think it's a good compromise.
Regards
JB
On 10/08/2012 05:55 PM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Jamie G. wrote:
Hi Claus,
From the Karaf 2.3.0 pom file:
1.2
Camel 2.10.x uses Spring 3.0.7 for now, for we are "aligned" with Camel
2.10.
Does it make sense to update to Spring 3.1.x (for future Camel version
maybe) ?
Regards
JB
On 10/08/2012 05:55 PM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Jamie G. wrote:
Hi Claus,
From the Karaf 2.
Spring 3.1.x is planned for Karaf 3.0 (with Jetty 8).
For 2.3.x, I'm OK to upgrade to Jetty 7.6.7, but not sure for Spring
3.1.x. I'm not against, but we should have update before, not at 24
hours from the release.
Let me make a try on my local working copy.
Regards
JB
On 10/08/2012 05:55 P
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Jamie G. wrote:
> Hi Claus,
>
> From the Karaf 2.3.0 pom file:
> 1.2.1
> 2.5.6.SEC03
> 3.0.7.RELEASE
>
Crap I think you guys shoulder consider switching to the 3.1.2 release
of Spring.
As well Jetty 7.6.7, so people have the latest stable release of these
2 importa
Hi Claus,
>From the Karaf 2.3.0 pom file:
1.2.1
2.5.6.SEC03
3.0.7.RELEASE
Cheers,
Jamie
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 1:09 PM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
> Hi
>
> What Spring version does Karaf 2.3.0 come with out of the box? 3.0.x
> or the newer 3.1.x ?
>
> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Jamie G. wrote:
>
Hi
What Spring version does Karaf 2.3.0 come with out of the box? 3.0.x
or the newer 3.1.x ?
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Jamie G. wrote:
> I'm always ready!
>
> Cheers,
> Jamie
>
> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 5:08 AM, j...@nanthrax.net wrote:
>> Great, thanks a lot !
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Baptiste O
I'm always ready!
Cheers,
Jamie
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 5:08 AM, j...@nanthrax.net wrote:
> Great, thanks a lot !
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbono...@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://wwx.talend.com
>
> - Reply message -
> From: "Andreas Pieber"
> To:
> Subjec
KARAF - Monday, October 8, 2012
12 Issues with Attachments
(sorted oldest to newest)
[KARAF-1226] Karaf Client cannot run a script
(2012-02-24 - Bug - Hendy Irawan)
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1226
[KARAF-1354] SSH Log-In failes with "Authentication
Great, thanks a lot !
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://wwx.talend.com
- Reply message -
From: "Andreas Pieber"
To:
Subject: Apache Karaf 2.3.0 very close
Date: Mon, Oct 8, 2012 9:17 am
Hey,
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 7:46 AM, Jean-Bapti
Hey,
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 7:46 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> @Andreas, could you take a look on KARAF-1878 and KARAF-1752 (assigned to
> you) ? If you are busy today, I think we can postpone to 2.3.1.
I wanted to keep KARAF-1878 opened for review till tonight; I'll apply
afterwards. I'll a
Hi Guillaume,
No worries, we can wait for the end of Mina 2.0.7 vote and upgrade in Karaf.
I gonna create the Jira about that (in order to avoid to forget it ;)).
Regards
JB
On 10/08/2012 08:44 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
I hate to say this, but I wonder if it would be worthwhile to wait an
ad
21 matches
Mail list logo
