Re: [PROPOSAL] Create integration (ServiceMix like) distribution in Karaf OSGi runtime

[Sobkowiak, Krzysztof]

+1 (binding)

I think, it's time to do this step. It's a difficult for me to say it 
after many years of contribution in this community. I think the idea of 
ServiceMix as oss integration platform was great but it is simply in a 
long agony actually. I think it has a chance to survive in the Karaf 
community.


When there are any features of current SMX distribution which will be 
not part of the integration distro (to not to make it too complicated) 
but are worth to survive, they can be simply described in a 
documentation as set of how-tos.


Best regards

Krzysztof


On 18.01.2023 13:44, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:

Hi guys,

The ServiceMix community is discussing about moving most of the SMX
parts into Karaf (the useful parts ;) ).

As part of this move, the "main" ServiceMix distribution is mainly a
Karaf assembly.

Currently, we have two distributions: "standard"
(apache-karaf-x.x.x.tar.gz) and "minimal"
(apache-karaf-minimal-x.x.x.tar.gz).

I propose to add a new distribution (in assemblies):
apache-karaf-integration-x.x.x.tar.gz containing ready to go
Karaf/Camel/CXF/ActiveMQ smooth integration.
Concretely, it means:
- we will have integration features repository XML
- we will have a distribution based on this features repository
- we will have itest on this distribution with the best coverage we can

If there is no objection, I will create the Jira and create a PR (as I
have almost all ready :)).

Thoughts ?

Regards
JB

Re: [PROPOSAL] Create integration (ServiceMix like) distribution in Karaf OSGi runtime

[Gerald Kallas]

+1 from mine, like the proposal.

> Jean-Baptiste Onofré  hat am 18.01.2023 13:44 CET 
> geschrieben:
> 
>  
> Hi guys,
> 
> The ServiceMix community is discussing about moving most of the SMX
> parts into Karaf (the useful parts ;) ).
> 
> As part of this move, the "main" ServiceMix distribution is mainly a
> Karaf assembly.
> 
> Currently, we have two distributions: "standard"
> (apache-karaf-x.x.x.tar.gz) and "minimal"
> (apache-karaf-minimal-x.x.x.tar.gz).
> 
> I propose to add a new distribution (in assemblies):
> apache-karaf-integration-x.x.x.tar.gz containing ready to go
> Karaf/Camel/CXF/ActiveMQ smooth integration.
> Concretely, it means:
> - we will have integration features repository XML
> - we will have a distribution based on this features repository
> - we will have itest on this distribution with the best coverage we can
> 
> If there is no objection, I will create the Jira and create a PR (as I
> have almost all ready :)).
> 
> Thoughts ?
> 
> Regards
> JB

Re: [PROPOSAL] Create integration (ServiceMix like) distribution in Karaf OSGi runtime

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Hi,

Fair point, the initial intent is "just" to have
https://github.com/apache/servicemix/tree/master/assemblies/apache-servicemix
like distribution in as apache-karaf-integration.

The users can build their custom distributions based on karaf minimal,
karaf standard, karaf integration.

Another option is not to create a full distribution, but features
repositories only and let user do the assembly. However, a lot of SMX
users don't want to create custom distro: they just want to extract &
run and then deploy their artifacts (ok, they are probably "old" style
:)).
Probably the option would be to have ready to use features
repositories, and "document" (or eventually add tool) how to use it.

Regards
JB

On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 10:42 AM Romain Manni-Bucau
 wrote:
>
> Hi JB,
>
> Whereas I can understand the intent I also see it will be hard because:
>
> 1. Default distro never matches well (even smix got custom distro)
> 2. Features are there for that exact need
>
> If I rephrase my point I guess the request looks more like "get us back what 
> vendors abandon" but this was mainly about support and contracts, here we'll 
> not get that so it looks to me we already provide that: karaf + features  (+ 
> optionally custom build if really needed).
> Not sticking to that sounds like you will get like hundreds of distro - 
> without thinking too hard I see:
> * cloud one (prometheus/health/log/...)
> * jaxrs whiteboard
> * jaxrs whiteboard + jpa (web profile like)
> * http whiteboard only
> * amq
> * amq + jpa
> * kafka
> * kafka + jpa
> * pulsar
> * pulsar + jpa
> * ...
> (and all potential matrix)
>
> Since features were designed to avoid that I think it makes sens to avoid to 
> go that path, it would also be consistent with the cloud spirit - even if the 
> move is not actual most companies target some cloud mindset, in particular a 
> better dep control - which means lighter distros.
>
>
> Hope it makes sense.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
>
>
> Le jeu. 19 janv. 2023 à 09:27, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  a 
> écrit :
>>
>> Hi Romain,
>>
>> It's a request to move "natively" to Karaf: most SMX users already
>> moved to Karaf, but they asked for a ready to go distribution. The few
>> SMX uses are looking for a similar distribution in Karaf (just to
>> avoid creating a distribution themselves).
>>
>> So, I see more as a new distribution in the Karaf OSGi runtime project
>> than a new subproject.
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 1:49 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
>>  wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi JB,
>> >
>> > Is there a community behind or did people already moved to Karaf so this is
>> > just about killing smix project officially.
>> >
>> > Trying to see if it is mainly about having really itests and enriching
>> > features.xml (theorically nothing new) or creating a new distro and almost
>> > a subproject.
>> >
>> >
>> > Le mer. 18 janv. 2023 à 13:44, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  a
>> > écrit :
>> >
>> > > Hi guys,
>> > >
>> > > The ServiceMix community is discussing about moving most of the SMX
>> > > parts into Karaf (the useful parts ;) ).
>> > >
>> > > As part of this move, the "main" ServiceMix distribution is mainly a
>> > > Karaf assembly.
>> > >
>> > > Currently, we have two distributions: "standard"
>> > > (apache-karaf-x.x.x.tar.gz) and "minimal"
>> > > (apache-karaf-minimal-x.x.x.tar.gz).
>> > >
>> > > I propose to add a new distribution (in assemblies):
>> > > apache-karaf-integration-x.x.x.tar.gz containing ready to go
>> > > Karaf/Camel/CXF/ActiveMQ smooth integration.
>> > > Concretely, it means:
>> > > - we will have integration features repository XML
>> > > - we will have a distribution based on this features repository
>> > > - we will have itest on this distribution with the best coverage we can
>> > >
>> > > If there is no objection, I will create the Jira and create a PR (as I
>> > > have almost all ready :)).
>> > >
>> > > Thoughts ?
>> > >
>> > > Regards
>> > > JB
>> > >

Re: [PROPOSAL] Create integration (ServiceMix like) distribution in Karaf OSGi runtime

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Hi JB,

Whereas I can understand the intent I also see it will be hard because:

1. Default distro never matches well (even smix got custom distro)
2. Features are there for that exact need

If I rephrase my point I guess the request looks more like "get us back
what vendors abandon" but this was mainly about support and contracts, here
we'll not get that so it looks to me we already provide that: karaf +
features  (+ optionally custom build if really needed).
Not sticking to that sounds like you will get like hundreds of distro -
without thinking too hard I see:
* cloud one (prometheus/health/log/...)
* jaxrs whiteboard
* jaxrs whiteboard + jpa (web profile like)
* http whiteboard only
* amq
* amq + jpa
* kafka
* kafka + jpa
* pulsar
* pulsar + jpa
* ...
(and all potential matrix)

Since features were designed to avoid that I think it makes sens to avoid
to go that path, it would also be consistent with the cloud spirit - even
if the move is not actual most companies target some cloud mindset, in
particular a better dep control - which means lighter distros.


Hope it makes sense.

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | Book



Le jeu. 19 janv. 2023 à 09:27, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  a
écrit :

> Hi Romain,
>
> It's a request to move "natively" to Karaf: most SMX users already
> moved to Karaf, but they asked for a ready to go distribution. The few
> SMX uses are looking for a similar distribution in Karaf (just to
> avoid creating a distribution themselves).
>
> So, I see more as a new distribution in the Karaf OSGi runtime project
> than a new subproject.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 1:49 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
>  wrote:
> >
> > Hi JB,
> >
> > Is there a community behind or did people already moved to Karaf so this
> is
> > just about killing smix project officially.
> >
> > Trying to see if it is mainly about having really itests and enriching
> > features.xml (theorically nothing new) or creating a new distro and
> almost
> > a subproject.
> >
> >
> > Le mer. 18 janv. 2023 à 13:44, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > > The ServiceMix community is discussing about moving most of the SMX
> > > parts into Karaf (the useful parts ;) ).
> > >
> > > As part of this move, the "main" ServiceMix distribution is mainly a
> > > Karaf assembly.
> > >
> > > Currently, we have two distributions: "standard"
> > > (apache-karaf-x.x.x.tar.gz) and "minimal"
> > > (apache-karaf-minimal-x.x.x.tar.gz).
> > >
> > > I propose to add a new distribution (in assemblies):
> > > apache-karaf-integration-x.x.x.tar.gz containing ready to go
> > > Karaf/Camel/CXF/ActiveMQ smooth integration.
> > > Concretely, it means:
> > > - we will have integration features repository XML
> > > - we will have a distribution based on this features repository
> > > - we will have itest on this distribution with the best coverage we can
> > >
> > > If there is no objection, I will create the Jira and create a PR (as I
> > > have almost all ready :)).
> > >
> > > Thoughts ?
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > JB
> > >
>

Re: [VOTE] Accept karaf-camel as new Apache Karaf subproject

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Hi,

I think it's important to split the discussion into two major aspects:
technical aspect and community aspect.

- Technically speaking, I don't see camel-karaf very different from
camel-spring-boot or camel-quarkus or camel-k. It contains Camel
specific to a platform, exactly like camel-quarkus or
camel-spring-boot. The painful part is the wrapping of Camel
components as features and sometimes the "impact" of OSGi on the Camel
components behavior. However, I send a message while ago on the Camel
dev mailing about couple of proposal to improve this, with highly
simplified Camel Karaf features repository, no need to use SMX bundles
anymore, no even need to wrap the Camel component as a bundle (most of
the logic is done at build and camel-osgi-core). So, I think that
technically speaking, we have room to improve the current situation
and for me it's not a blocker.
- Now about the community. I think we have to say things clearly: we
know that the company mainly contributing on Camel doesn't want to
support Karaf/OSGi anymore, due to roadmap change and business
perspective. That's fair and fully understable. Where we have to be
careful is that, as Apache project, if the community still wants to
contribute and maintain Camel Karaf in Camel project, it's also a fair
request, and this company should be supportive of that (and not
"block" this community driven decision). Since the beginning of this
discussion, I have tried to find a consensus matching everyone's
expectation and wish (that's one of the core values of the Apache
way).  I thought the different communities wanted to move Camel Karaf
to Karaf. But this thread shows it's not the case for everyone.

So, I think it makes sense to cancel the formal vote now and start a
new discussion round. If we don't have consensus about the move, then
we will focus on the first point: keeping camel-karaf at camel and
improving use/maintenance/etc from a technical standpoint.

Thoughts ?

Regards
JB

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 9:14 PM Andrea Cosentino  wrote:
>
> As a side note, it's not only aligning the features, it's also upgrading
> the servicemix bundles to be able to align, JB knows what I'm talking about.
>
> I helped there a lot too (less in the last year or so) and it's really a
> mess.
>
> Il mer 18 gen 2023, 20:43 Romain Manni-Bucau  ha
> scritto:
>
> > Le mer. 18 janv. 2023 à 20:17, Andrea Cosentino  a
> > écrit :
> >
> > > Il mer 18 gen 2023, 20:06 Romain Manni-Bucau  ha
> > > scritto:
> > >
> > > > Le mer. 18 janv. 2023 à 19:43, Andrea Cosentino  a
> > > > écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > The point is just one in relation to OSGi metadata. The components
> > will
> > > > be
> > > > > consumed, also, by runtimes that don't need OSGi metadata, so why all
> > > the
> > > > > components should be with OSGi metadata and packaged as bundles?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm maybe a bit dumb but why all the work and meta for quarkus and
> > spring
> > > > boot if the reasoning is right?
> > > > I perfectly understand spring or quarkus have their own programming
> > > > model/runtime so need specific code and meta but then how is OSGi
> > > > different?
> > > >
> > > > A simple example is that you should be able to drop most jandex indices
> > > if
> > > > your statement is true.
> > > >
> > >
> > > My point is related more to have the components as bundles with OSGi
> > > metadata. To me they should be just JAR.
> > >   Mainly the reason I'm saying this about supporting camel-karaf because
> > > the work wi be on the shoulders of 1 developer and this is not right for
> > me
> > > and for the community.
> > >
> >
> > Sure but osgi bundles always had been designed to be just jars as much as a
> > jar with a jandex index or even with a custom manifest metadata or a json
> > containing the pom description ;).
> >
> > But I fully share with you the ownership point.
> > Any bundle (more generally meta maintenance) should be owned by the core
> > code writer otherwise we end in weird state all the time, in particular
> > when parts are optionals or need some specific loading mecanism
> > (serviceloader for ex). The lifecycle is also an issue in time, we already
> > are there with features around whiteboards for ex and camel itself has a
> > hard time ensuring  components work together so fear camel can be a bit big
> > to have this enrichment work done properly outside camel in a project with
> > less task force than camel itself.
> >
> >
> > > Just this.
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't see the reason why. At least the OSGi metadata should be
> > > > generated
> > > > > under camel Karaf project, instead of being part of the core
> > components
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I think the exact opposite since handling metadata in a 3rd always got
> > > > proven not working very well for end user.
> > > > SMix did a bunch of forks for that reason - which was enabling users
> > but
> > > > also a big constrait since users were not able to use 

Re: [PROPOSAL] Create integration (ServiceMix like) distribution in Karaf OSGi runtime

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Hi Romain,

It's a request to move "natively" to Karaf: most SMX users already
moved to Karaf, but they asked for a ready to go distribution. The few
SMX uses are looking for a similar distribution in Karaf (just to
avoid creating a distribution themselves).

So, I see more as a new distribution in the Karaf OSGi runtime project
than a new subproject.

Regards
JB

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 1:49 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
 wrote:
>
> Hi JB,
>
> Is there a community behind or did people already moved to Karaf so this is
> just about killing smix project officially.
>
> Trying to see if it is mainly about having really itests and enriching
> features.xml (theorically nothing new) or creating a new distro and almost
> a subproject.
>
>
> Le mer. 18 janv. 2023 à 13:44, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  a
> écrit :
>
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > The ServiceMix community is discussing about moving most of the SMX
> > parts into Karaf (the useful parts ;) ).
> >
> > As part of this move, the "main" ServiceMix distribution is mainly a
> > Karaf assembly.
> >
> > Currently, we have two distributions: "standard"
> > (apache-karaf-x.x.x.tar.gz) and "minimal"
> > (apache-karaf-minimal-x.x.x.tar.gz).
> >
> > I propose to add a new distribution (in assemblies):
> > apache-karaf-integration-x.x.x.tar.gz containing ready to go
> > Karaf/Camel/CXF/ActiveMQ smooth integration.
> > Concretely, it means:
> > - we will have integration features repository XML
> > - we will have a distribution based on this features repository
> > - we will have itest on this distribution with the best coverage we can
> >
> > If there is no objection, I will create the Jira and create a PR (as I
> > have almost all ready :)).
> >
> > Thoughts ?
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >