karaf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andreas Pieber <anpie...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: 3rd Party Feature Definitions
Date Thu, 11 Oct 2012 17:14:12 GMT
ah, and last but not least: we might want this discussion to be held
on the dev list.

Kind regards,

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 7:13 PM, Andreas Pieber <anpieber@gmail.com> wrote:
> OK, now that I finally found my way through the original thread
> causing this discussion I'm even stronger +1 for this topic than
> before.
> Get out everything out of the core release which is not started by
> default in the default apache-karaf distribution.
> To make things easy for us we might pack all those other features and
> commands and so on into a single release structure to make it easy for
> us which is quite roughly compatible to karaf core 2.x.y(.z) for Karaf
> 2 compatible plugins and 3.x.y(.z) for Karaf 3 compatible extensions.
> This should make the vote & the release process easy enough for us AND
> since we can version the features independently of the full release
> versions the user can still mix them as he sees fit.
> Just something else to get the discussion about this going :-)
> Kind regards,
> Andreas
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 6:54 PM, Andreas Pieber <anpieber@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Well, IIRC we've discussed this already on IRC some time ago about
>> that. One the main problems by this was that we need to release all of
>> those separately; which adds quite some work.
>> But basically I'm with you. It's a PITA with those spring & aries
>> enterprise feature upgrades and that we have to wait for them. IMHO we
>> should really re-discuss this issue again; to move anything not
>> required into different features. Thanks to Christians searchurl
>> feature we could still make it pretty easy for ppl to add them
>> afterwards if they like. This wouldn't make too much difference to how
>> we're handling it right now anyhow...
>> WDYT?
>> Kind regards,
>> Andreas
>> On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 11:19 PM, Scott England-Sullivan
>> <sully6768@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> In a recent thread on the development list there was a discussion
>>> regarding the release of Karaf 2.3.0 and the possibility of holding it
>>> up to accommodate an update to Spring 3.1.  It struck me; why is Karaf
>>> tied to a 3rd party release at all?  Why isn't the modular container
>>> itself modular?  Why aren't 3rd party support modules such as Spring
>>> deployers externalized and allowed to progress at their own pace?
>>> Third party dependent modules should be developed against a given
>>> release of Karaf, they shouldn't drive it.  There is a new
>>> karaf-webconsole project so the precedence is there.
>>> Karaf is a great, light-weight container which put a nice manageable
>>> wrapper on OSGi with a great CLI, ConfigAdmin, provisioning, etc., and
>>> IMHO should stay focused on just that at its core.  The capabilities
>>> that are tied to simplifying 3rd party support are goodness but not
>>> required and as such, shouldn't drive the cores development.
>>> Now maybe you really can't separate one from the other though I don't
>>> see where it is tightly coupled at.  I also understand it is a greater
>>> challenge to manage because the project become fractured but maybe
>>> Karaf is at that point.
>>> In reality I am good either way but thought it was worth discussing.
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Scott ES
>>> --
>>> --
>>> Scott England-Sullivan
>>> Apache Camel Committer
>>> Principal Consultant / Sr. Architect | Red Hat, Inc.
>>> FuseSource is now part of Red Hat
>>> Web:     fusesource.com | redhat.com
>>> Blog:     sully6768.blogspot.com
>>> Twitter: sully6768

View raw message