+1 on bringing Karaf 5 into the Apache Karaf project. My $0.02 on naming is that perhaps the ‘5’ should drop off, since it’ll have its own version number and in case w/ need a Karaf Runtime v5.x to support all the OSGi + Jakarta + JDK changes coming.
Regarding name ideas— I think short and simple is best! Boot, Blend, etc. Perhaps whittle it down to 2 or 3 ideas? Thanks, Matt Pavlovich > On Oct 6, 2022, at 8:59 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> wrote: > > It sounds good too ! > > Regards > JB > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 3:57 PM Jamie G. <jamie.goody...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Perhaps something like Apache Karaf Sustineri ? >> >> - The sustainably sourced modulith runtime >> >> On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 11:22 AM Serge Huber <shu...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> Thanks for the contribution JB. >>> >>> Personally I think we should maybe look into having a new name for it to >>> make it easy to distinguish from Karaf ? >>> >>> I'm especially worried if there ever is a Karaf 5 and K5 it's going to >>> become very confusing. >>> >>> I don't have great alternative solutions for the moment but maybe something >>> like Alembic, Cauldron, ... >>> >>> Regards, >>> Serge... >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 3:38 PM Francois Papon <francois.pa...@openobject.fr> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> May be yes, we should find a project name more not old Karaf related to >>>> not lost the users. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> On 06/10/2022 15:25, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I don't use Karaf5, but K5 ;) >>>>> >>>>> And yes, the first release would be K5 1.0 (for instance, 1.1, 2.0, >>>>> 2.1, 2.2, 3.0, etc, etc). >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> JB >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 3:12 PM Jamie G. <jamie.goody...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> Agreed that proper naming and transition/migration guides will be >>>>>> necessary then to guide users. >>>>>> >>>>>> A question on the name "Karaf5" - what would its first release version >>>>>> be? 1.0.0? 5.0.0? >>>>>> It may be a little awkward to search Karaf5 2.0 or Karaf5 6.0. as it >>>>>> matures/evolves. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 10:10 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Jamie, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Correct: we can imagine having the karaf-k4 module providing the same >>>>>>> support as Karaf (4): OSGi, features service, etc. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To be honest, that's not my intention (I don't want to have K4 and K5 >>>>>>> coupled somehow together), but possible. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> IMHO, we will have Karaf users and K5 users, different usage. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>> JB >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 2:21 PM Jamie G. <jamie.goody...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> To my understanding it doesn't prevent OSGi, it just does not require >>>>>>>> it (very much in the spirit of Karaf letting you choose what you want >>>>>>>> to run Equinox/Felix, Log4j/SLF4j, etc). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In theory can an end user take their well formed application >>>>>>>> (features) and directly deploy them into K5 without refactoring? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I've worked on numerous projects which started at Karaf 2, and have >>>>>>>> updated progressively to K3, K4. Does K5 represent a roadblock to >>>>>>>> evolution? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 9:36 AM 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 >>>>
