Hi Lukasz, If you are right about K5 doesn't use OSGi at core, K5 is new milestone on Karaf as:
1. It can still optionally support OSGi 2. It will provide few similar features as Karaf (JMX, shell, etc) but not powered by OSGi anymore. That's why I'm using K5 (and not Karaf5 ;)). K5 is its own name. If the others want something "more different", I can provide some. I think K5 is strong enough. Thoughts ? Regards JB On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 2:06 PM Łukasz Dywicki <l...@code-house.org> wrote: > > Hello, > Looking forward towards donation of it as a subproject with clear name. > Tehhnically speaking it is not Karaf 5 since it is not based on earlier > principles. Dropping osgi is large change which will confuse existing users. > Hence following the ActiveMQ Artemis story we should be clear it is a new > thing and has some things in common, but many more not inlined, with earlier > release. > > Best, > Łukasz > -- > Code-House > http://code-house.org > > > On 4 Oct 2022, at 18:35, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> wrote: > > > > Hi guys, > > > > As already discussed on the mailing list several times before, I think > > Karaf 5 (a.k.a K5) is now in a good first shape (usable). > > > > In a nutshell, K5 is a modulith runtime, able to launch and co-locate > > different kinds of modules/applications. It also provides a very > > simple services programming model. > > > > You can find documentation about K5 here: > > > > https://jbonofre.github.io/karaf5/ > > > > NB: I will add the tools documentation asap. > > > > You can find the current source code here: > > > > https://github.com/jbonofre/karaf5 > > > > NB: you can see the tests as kind of examples. > > > > Here's, basically my proposal I would discuss with you: > > > > 1. Create a dedicated repository for K5, something like > > http://github.com/apache/karaf-k5 > > 2. For issue tracker and CI/CD, I propose to use GitHub resources > > (GitHub Issues and GitHub Actions). It's now an accepted and possible > > option from the Apache Software Foundation standpoint. > > 3. For the website, I think karaf.apache.org should be just a landing > > page containing all "generic" topics about Apache Karaf project > > (mailing list, legal, etc) and then directed to Karaf 4 or K5, having > > dedicated sub websites for each. > > > > Thoughts ? > > > > Thanks, > > Regards > > JB
