My big +1 Daniel. OSGi support is very important for us. Whether ActiveMQ
{CodeName} will be a future ActiveMQ
mainstream or not user should have possibility to chose ActiveMQ {CodeName} as
the broker in ServiceMix. But it requires
OSGi support.
Regards
Krzysztof
On 15.04.2015 18:23, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
> Couple things I think are important:
>
> 1) OSGi support - in particular the Karaf features and various commands and
> such for starting and configuring the brokers within Karaf.
>
> 2) Related to (1) - using the “normal” libraries that we would use within
> Karaf. The particular one I’m thinking of is using CXF for the
> activemq-rest stuff instead of ActiveMQ. There are issues with having two
> JAX-RS implementations within a runtime so I would think it’s important to be
> able to use the one more of us are using within Karaf.
>
> I think those would be somewhat required for being able to have a ServiceMix
> that uses this.
>
>
> Dan
>
>
>
>> On Apr 15, 2015, at 11:56 AM, James Carman <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> In order for ActiveMQ {CodeName} to take over as the next generation
>> of ActiveMQ, it obviously must have some level of feature parity with
>> the existing ActiveMQ 5.x (or 6.x if it's released before that
>> transition) offering. We should come up with some level of a roadmap
>> together about which features are required. Thus far, the only
>> big-ticket items that have been addressed are:
>>
>> 1. The OpenWire protocol is supported
>> 2. Auto-creation of destinations (mostly complete).
>>
>> This is obviously not all of what the existing ActiveMQ is all about.
>> What other features are folks wanting to see in the next generation
>> ActiveMQ?
>>
>> James
--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak
JEE & OSS Architect
Apache Software Foundation Member
Apache ServiceMix <http://servicemix.apache.org/> Committer & PMC chair
Senior Solution Architect @ Capgemini SSC <http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/en/>
