Maybe bus instead of orchestration which has 2-3 other meanings in nowdays world?
Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://x.com/rmannibucau> | .NET Blog <https://dotnetbirdie.github.io/> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.github.io/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/en-us/product/java-ee-8-high-performance-9781788473064> Javaccino founder (Java/.NET service - contact via linkedin) Le mer. 6 mai 2026, 18:06, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> a écrit : > Hi, > > I understand the reasoning behind those names. My main priority is ensuring > that the names are explicit and that "Karaf Cloud" wouldn't be > misinterpreted by our users. > > That being said, I still have a slight preference for the following: > - Karaf PAX > - Karaf > - Karaf Orchestration > > Thoughts? > > Regards, > JB > > On Wed, May 6, 2026 at 4:25 PM Francois Papon < > [email protected]> > wrote: > > > My thoughts was that > > > > - Karaf OSGi => OSGi is used internaly and by users > > > > - Karaf Cloud => OSGi is used internaly only and not by userrs > > > > The name "Cloud" was because it's focused on immutable resolver at build > > time but I am ok with the others proposals. > > > > regards, > > > > François > > [email protected] > > [email protected] > > > > Le 06/05/2026 à 15:32, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit : > > > Technically, (using your name), both Karaf OSGi and Karaf Cloud are > OSGi > > > internally. > > > > > > Karaf Cloud looks a bit "weird" to me because it isn't cloud-specific. > > > > > > Mixing your proposal and Romain's proposal, what about: > > > > > > - Karaf -> Karaf PAX > > > - Karaf Simple -> Karaf > > > - Karaf Integration -> Karaf Orchestration > > > - Karaf Minimal -> delete > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > Regards > > > JB > > > > > > On Wed, May 6, 2026 at 1:47 PM Francois Papon < > > [email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> May be having : > > >> > > >> - Karaf > Karaf OSGi > > >> > > >> - Karaf Simple > Karaf Cloud > > >> > > >> - Karaf Integration > Karaf Orchestration > > >> > > >> I think tagging the standard distribution as OSGi will help to > abstract > > >> the OSGi part on the others distribution. > > >> > > >> regards, > > >> > > >> François > > >> [email protected] > > >> [email protected] > > >> > > >> Le 06/05/2026 à 11:12, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit : > > >>> Hi everyone, > > >>> > > >>> Currently, we provide 3 Karaf distributions: > > >>> - Karaf > > >>> - Karaf Minimal > > >>> - Karaf Integration > > >>> > > >>> 1. Karaf > > >>> This is our standard distribution, packaging the full feature > > >>> resolver/service (supporting cap/req), sshd, deployers, diagnostic, > > kar, > > >>> wrapper, etc. > > >>> That's the de facto most used distribution. > > >>> > > >>> 2. Karaf Minimal > > >>> This is a very light distribution, packaging the full feature > > >>> resolver/service, config, local shell console, ... Hot deployment, > etc > > >> are > > >>> not packaged in this distribution by default. > > >>> > > >>> 3. Karaf Integration > > >>> This is based on the Karaf distribution, adding Apache Camel, > ActiveMQ > > >>> (similar to what was Apache ServiceMix). > > >>> > > >>> Now, with the new feature service (simple resolver), and the Karaf > > >> services > > >>> (Karaf URL, Karaf Web, etc), I propose creating a new distribution > > >>> packaging the simple feature service (instead of the full one, and > > >>> providing Karaf services instead of Pax services. > > >>> > > >>> I have two questions for you: > > >>> 1. Should we keep the Karaf Minimal distribution? I'm not sure this > > >>> distribution is actually heavily used. > > >>> 2. Should we rename Karaf as Karaf "Full" and use Karaf for the new > > >>> distribution (the one with the simple feature service and Karaf > > >> services)? > > >>> Or should we keep the Karaf distribution as it is today and > introduce a > > >> new > > >>> distribution "Karaf Simple"? > > >>> > > >>> Thoughts? > > >>> > > >>> Regards > > >>> JB > > >>> > > >
