+1 for Andreas's first plan. Freeman －－－－－－－－－－－－－ Freeman Fang
FuseSource Email:ff...@fusesource.com Web: fusesource.com Twitter: freemanfang Blog: http://freemanfang.blogspot.com http://blog.sina.com.cn/u/1473905042 weibo: http://weibo.com/u/1473905042 On 2012-8-18, at 下午1:19, Andreas Pieber wrote: > TBH I personally would rather prefer: > > - Karaf 2.2.x => OSGi core 4.2.0 > - Karaf 2.3.x => OSGi core 4.3.0 > - Karaf 3.x.y => OSGi core 4.3.0 > - Karaf 4.x.y => OSGi core 5.0.0 > > or > > - Karaf 2.2.x => OSGi core 4.2.0 > - Karaf 2.3.x => OSGi core 4.3.0 > - Karaf 3.x.y => OSGi core 5.0.0 > > I know that both options are not really optimal, but I don't think > that we really want to upgrade the inner core of the entire thing to > the next major version in a minor of Karaf. There where some API > changes from a user lvl of view which disallow to drop the same bundle > into a 4.2/4.3 environment and a 5.0. I do not really fancy the idea > of breaking compatibility between minor releases. If ppls setup break > from one minor to the next they lost trust and upgrade ways too late > although there should be no reason. > > WDYT? > > Kind regards, > Andreas > > On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 12:47 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > wrote: >> Hi team, >> >> As you know, OSGi core 5.0.0 has been released. >> >> I would like to discuss about which version of Karaf should support which >> version of the OSGi core (and so the corresponding OSGi frameworks). >> >> I have the following proposal: >> >> - Karaf 2.2.x => OSGi core 4.2.0 >> - Karaf 2.3.x => OSGi core 4.3.0 >> - Karaf 3.0.x => OSGi core 4.3.0 >> - Karaf 3.1.x => OSGi core 5.0.0 >> >> I would wait Karaf 3.1.x to update to OSGi core 5.0.0 as the OSGi frameworks >> are not yet fully ready on this specification. >> >> WDYT ? >> >> Regards >> JB >> -- >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> jbono...@apache.org >> http://blog.nanthrax.net >> Talend - http://www.talend.com
