camel-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Claus Ibsen <>
Subject Re: [discuss] Future of the camel-jetty producer side
Date Thu, 11 Dec 2014 06:32:37 GMT
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Christian Schneider
<> wrote:
> I agree with Dan that a common module and one module for jetty8 and one for
> jetty9 is probably the best route to go. Like Willem mentioned we can even
> try to create a http common module if possible. I would start with a jetty
> based common module first as it is probably the easier step.

Yeah sounds good.

And frankly a camel-http-core would maybe also be good, which has no
or only dependency on the servlet api. Then there can be some shared
code that the various HTTP components can rely and reuse.

> I am not yet sure how to do the sepearation between the common and the jetty
> version dependent part. To get a better feeling for it I started to simply
> switch the client part to jetty 9 in the current module. So I can see how
> the new jetty 9 based module wouldd look like. I plan to have this fully
> working till end of the week and will commit it in a temporary branch for
> you guys to review.

Good idea, as its likely a somewhat big change, and better to see the
changes in a branch so other changes wont "clutter".

> As a next step we should then define the separation between the modules. The
> last step would then be to implement the three modules.
> For the karaf feature I plan to use the new conditional descriptors to
> install the correct module depending on the karaf runtime. So for karaf 2.4
> and 3 it should install the jetty8 one and for karaf 4 it should install the
> jetty 9 one.
> Both of the modules would be installed with the same feature camel-jetty and
> the same prefix jetty: . So this should minimize the impact on users. This
> approach should also allow us to work with an upcoming jetty 10.

Sounds good. Is that a karaf 4 only thing?

> Do we all agree that on camel master we only need to support jetty 8 and 9
> and can safely remove jetty 7 support as Dan has already done?

Yes jetty 7 can and should be dropped/removed

What about CXF, what versions of Jetty does it support?
Does CXF 3.0.x support both jetty 8 and 9?

eg so we can do a SMX release with Camel 2.15 + CXF 3.0.x + Karaf 3.0
+ AMQ 5.11 and they all live happy together with the same version of

ActiveMQ 5.11 may need to be made jetty 8 + 9 compatible also.

> Christian
> On 09.12.2014 11:18, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>> Jetty 8 (and 7) are already end of life so we’re trying to figure out the
>> “best” way to get Jetty 9 support so we can get a camel-jetty component that
>> can use a supported version of Jetty.   So for Camel 2.15, the question, to
>> me, is how to support both 8 and 9 (assuming we need to support 8 which I
>> think is a good assumption).
>> We could have separate “camel-jetty” and “camel-jetty8” components, but
>> there would be a huge amount of code duplication which is always a concern.
>> Another option is a camel-jetty-common with then the two subcomponents
>> depending on that.   That would reduce the duplication, but would obviously
>> then add another jar/bundle.   Not sure if that is a big deal.   We could
>> shade that into the two others.  Test class duplication would still be a
>> problem.
>> Dan
> --
> Christian Schneider
> Open Source Architect

Claus Ibsen
Red Hat, Inc.
Twitter: davsclaus
Author of Camel in Action:

View raw message