Let's just say I have a bottle of wine that i'd like to decant in the near future ;)
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Andreas Pieber <anpie...@gmail.com> 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. <jamie.goody...@gmail.com> 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 <j...@nanthrax.net> >> 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >
