Hi,
Ok for Apache Karaf Minho but please, don't rename Apache Karaf 4.x to
Apache Karaf Classic :D
regards,
Francois
On 07/10/2022 12:57, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
My preference is Apache Karaf Minho.
What do you think to rename Karaf 4.5.0 with a different name too ? In
order to avoid any confusion: Apache Karaf is the umbrella project and we
will have only subprojects (like in Felix).
Thoughts ?
Regards
JB
Le jeu. 6 oct. 2022 à 20:12, Matt Pavlovich <mattr...@gmail.com> a écrit :
+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
