karaf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From mikevan <mvangeert...@comcast.net>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Towards Karaf 3.0.0
Date Mon, 11 Jul 2011 16:01:19 GMT
+1 (non-binding on all of the items being discussed for a Karaf 3.0 release)
-1 for doing a RC release.  None of my users will use that, and the time it
would take to do an RC is more than we need.  My suggestion is that we
simply tag/branch a 3.0 release, test it, and then if folks need to make
fixes we apply them to the tag/branch the merging them into the trunk.



Andreas Pieber wrote:
> 
> @RC again; I'm definitely with Achim here (except that you really like
> to do the work Jamie :)) that we may ping the smx/geronimo communities
> to also provide snapshots of their products based on karaf_RC. that
> way the work will really pay off since we'll get tons of more user
> feedback (I assume) than simply do this for karaf alone (there are
> ways less projects depending on karaf directly I assume; comparing the
> download volume of SMX to karaf :))
> 
> Kind regards,
> Andreas
> 
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Jamie G. &lt;jamie.goodyear@gmail.com&gt;
> wrote:
>> I think adding two more features to 3.0.0 then going for an RC makes
>> sense.
>>
>> As to an early RC that is not intended to be a 'true' release
>> candidate, I'm game to produce one if we think it'll help with
>> adoption/testing for the real 3.0.0.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jamie
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> &lt;jb@nanthrax.net&gt; wrote:
>>> Hi Christian,
>>>
>>> I'm agree with both of you :)
>>>
>>> We are going to release Karaf 3.0.0, not Karaf 2.3. It means that the
>>> end-users expect some new features in Karaf 3.0.0.
>>>
>>> I'm agree with Andreas to add two main enhancements/new features in
>>> Karaf 3.0.0.
>>>
>>> But, as you rightly said, we also need to focus on the code cleanup.
>>>
>>> I propose to choose two enhancements to be included in Karaf 3.0.0, and
>>> postpone the others to 3.1.0.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon 11/07/11 15:16 , Christian Schneider  wrote::
>>>
>>> Hi Andreas,
>>>
>>> I don´t think we need killer features to do a 3.0.0 as we can do feature
>>> enhancements in 3.1.0 without any problems. We should instead focus on
>>> refactorings that may break code and remove deprecated stuff.
>>> These should go into 3.0.0 as we should try to stay compatible in the
>>> minor releases that follow.
>>>
>>> In general I would like to get out 3.0.0 as soon as possible. This can
>>> only be done by postponing some feature to 3.1.0. I think this does not
>>> hurt much. We need time to create the more complicated features anyway
>>> and we can do the 3.1.0 release quite soon.
>>>
>>> So I think the question is: Will the features you named (profiles, Kar
>>> files, enterprise repository) break APIs? If yes they need to go into
>>> 3.0.0 or we at least need to change the APIs. If no then I see no need
>>> to halt the release as we can put them into 3.1.0.
>>>
>>> Christian
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 11.07.2011 14:26, schrieb Andreas Pieber:
>>>>
>>>> TBH I'm not too happy with the current roadmap. There are only
>>>> bug-fixes or minor enhancements which are also backported to 2.x; IMHO
>>>> we're missing at least 1-2 killer features making it worth for people
>>>> to upgrade to 3.x. We had various of those topics  in the karaf
>>>> birthday (btw, when will be the next one? This was fun :)) discussion
>>>> and on our roadmap. By link:
>>>>
>>>> *
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KARAF/Apache+Karaf+First+Birthday+Meeting+%282011-06-16%29>
>>>> * https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KARAF/Roadmap>
>>>>
>>>> By name:
>>>>
>>>> * Clustering (ok, this is cellar and already possible on 2.x)
>>>> * Karaf profiles&  Kar files (IMHO this is one of the most important
>>>> features for 3.x and not present in the issues by now; there had been
>>>> considerable work on this by David, but still, we're missing a
>>>> possibility to start e.g. CXF without modifying some files in etc)
>>>> * Karaf Enterprise Repository (No issue and no work on this by now)
>>>> * JDK 1.6 (done)
>>>> * Tooling&  dependencies (here is still some work to do (and no issues)
>>>> * JAAS easy configuration (is it easier by now?)
>>>> * Improve Karaf development platform
>>>> * Web Console (I think this is not such a thing for 3.x; I'll provide
>>>> a prototype for this one with pax-wicket asap pax-wicket reaches 1.0
>>>> (latest end auf August I hope)
>>>> * Karaf Cave OBR (OK, not relevant for 3.x; rather a new subproject)
>>>>
>>>> OK, with all of them named I think Karaf-3.0 should at least contain
>>>> two of the above mentioned features to be REALLY valuable for all
>>>> people. Considering the threads on related mailinglists (smx, cxf,
>>>> camel, ...) I think the following two should be definitely in 3.0 (at
>>>> least for 70% and usable):
>>>>
>>>> * Karaf profiles&  Kar files
>>>> * Karaf Enterprise Repository
>>>>
>>>> WDYT?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> --
>>> Christian Schneider
>>> http://www.liquid-reality.de
>>>
>>> Open Source Architect
>>> Talend Application Integration Division http://www.talend.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> 


-----
Mike Van
--
View this message in context: http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Towards-Karaf-3-0-0-tp3158763p3159611.html
Sent from the Karaf - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Mime
View raw message