Moving forward with the future code base on the main/master branch is
fine with me.
Maintenance of Karaf 4 branches on 4.3.x, 4.4.x, 4.5.x, etc can
proceed into the future as required.
Cheers,
Jamie
On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 5:22 AM Francois Papon
wrote:
>
> I think it's better to move forward on
Hi,
If we want to dedicated repo (which I'm not against), we have to find a
name keeping the karaf branding.
That's why I wanted to keep the karaf repo.
What's about karaf-runtime repo ?
Regards
JB
On 07/02/2022 08:37, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
Hi
think it makes sense to keep another
Since it will act as a container/orchestrator we could play on the
"container" and use "karaf-crystal" or even "karaf-millesime" or something
in this spirit?
The overall point is to avoid to "simply" look like karaf 4+1 which is
limiting and karaf 4 will stay IMHO even wih karaf 5 (said this way
karaf-barrel ? ;)
On 07/02/2022 09:37, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
Since it will act as a container/orchestrator we could play on the
"container" and use "karaf-crystal" or even "karaf-millesime" or something
in this spirit?
The overall point is to avoid to "simply" look like karaf 4+1 which is
I think it's better to move forward on a branch and wait to see if there
is feedback from users about a first RC before thinking on a new brand
name :)
regards,
François
On 07/02/2022 09:48, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
karaf-barrel ? ;)
On 07/02/2022 09:37, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
Since
