Hi,
Am 11.04.2021 um 07:48 schrieb Jean-Baptiste Onofre:
> I will move forward quickly on Karaf 4.3.2 due to the following issue
> detected:
>
> - Upgrade xbean to 4.19 for better support on war artifacts
> - Upgrade Pax Web for new Jetty version and xbean
Does that include an update to Jetty
env.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 10/31/2016 02:02 PM, Sascha Vogt wrote:
>> @Achim / @JB:
>>
>> Sorry for the misunderstanding. I didn't mean to ship a binary
>> distribution with a JVM embedded, I meant to modify the scripts so that
>> Karaf by default pre
;
> We can provide a script (like a dockerfiles I created) to let users
> create their own custom distro.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 10/31/2016 01:33 PM, Sascha Vogt wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> we're workig on a Karaf based product and have the requireme
Hi all,
we're workig on a Karaf based product and have the requirement to use
the JVM we ship with the product. We thought that might also be
interesting to others, so we wanted to share our proposal / current
implementation (and are also willing to provide the required patches).
Main idea is to
Hi Scott,
Am 16.02.2016 um 18:47 schrieb Scott Lewis:
> Would it be possible for you to make this test/benchmark code
> available? We haven't seen this pattern before, and I would like to
> use it to determine what is going on.
Benchmark is available at Johannes Github:
Hi,
Am 16.02.2016 um 23:33 schrieb Christian Schneider:
> Yes. To have double the performance in a binary transport is also what I
> would expect.
> I also think the performance you measured for CXF should be fine.
>
> I wonder why ECF and Amdatu would be so much slower. Maybe there is just
>
Hi all,
we (a colleague of mine and myself) started searching for a
high-performance / lightweight remote OSGi implementation. We have a
requirement that the implementation has to /also/ (in addition to Karaf)
run on a heavily customized JBoss 7.1.1 as well, so the lightweight part
was kinda
