Making sure our technology is visible and well integrated imho will be key to adoption.
For that, I don't think we need to choose one platform over the other, I don't see it as an either-or, more like if we have contributors that want to work on that. I agree on challenges around releases, we do not want to align our releases with external release schedules like Quarkus. But I believe this should not be required, for example the quarkus ecosystem should give us a lot of flexibility to release at our own pace. And we can decide what version of Quarkus we are targeting (more slowly following the LTS rather than always chasing the latest community). Finally, I believe there are definitely strong signs of people looking for this kind of integration, and that it's helping to expose our technology. The fact that the 10.0 release is a prerequisite for this has prevented us from doing this, but I still get this question regularly from people within the Quarkus community. Of course this should not block any of our release work, I believe this is something we can look into once the release is available and approved, as it's basically more adding our project to the registry of known plugins so people know where to find our artefacts. Thx, Kris On Wed, Aug 7, 2024 at 5:43 PM Jason Porter <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree with all of this discussion. There are plenty of projects out > there that have modules/integrations/whatever with various platforms and > are not considered "part of" the platform. I think KIE ends up being the > same thing. It runs on/with Quarkus and Spring Boot, but doesn't > necessarily follow the same release cadence. I don't think we've been > listed as part of the Quarkus ecosystem since version 2 of Quarkus. I don't > know about Spring Boot. > > I really think we grow faster making Spring Boot a first class integration > for us. We'll get more people joining, using, helping, etc. > > On 2024/08/07 11:23:37 Alex Porcelli wrote: > > Quarkus is a fast paced environment, we still struggle to release 10; > > > > Once we have a regular consistent release schedule we can better > evaluate. > > > > +1 big time to raise SB3 as first class citizen before considering > Quarkus > > platform. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2024 at 5:34 AM Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Although it has not been our policy so far, from a community > perspective I > > > fully agree with Enrique, for the same reasons he argued. > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2024 at 11:21 AM Enrique Gonzalez Martinez < > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Tibor, > > > > Honestly I don't think we should make the effort to publish our > > > > extensions there (either quarkus or spring boot). This will tie us to > > > > their lifecycle and that could be overkilling right now for us, as we > > > > are moving towards GA. When the project is more mature I think there > > > > might be room to do it, but right now I don't think we should be part > > > > of those platforms., > > > > > > > > El mié, 7 ago 2024 a las 11:12, Tibor Zimányi (<[email protected] > >) > > > > escribió: > > > > > > > > > > Hi Toshiya, > > > > > > > > > > thank you for opening this thread. I personally think, we should be > > > part > > > > of > > > > > Quarkus platform. However I think the question should be broader. > > > > Majority > > > > > in the industry use Spring, so I think we should resolve this > > > discussion > > > > on > > > > > a broader scale. I think Spring (and Spring Boot) should be a first > > > class > > > > > citizen too in our code the same way Quarkus is. So I think the > > > > discussion > > > > > should be about if we want KIE be part of both Quarkus platform and > > > > > start.spring.io. > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > Tibor > > > > > > > > > > Dňa st 7. 8. 2024, 11:06 Toshiya Kobayashi < > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > napísal(a): > > > > > > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > > > > > > > Jan raised a concern > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd check one thing here with the mailing list - if we still > want > > > to > > > > > > perform any steps towards being part of that platform. I mean, > fixing > > > > > > pipelines is a good thing here, but I am not sure if we actually > want > > > > to > > > > > > make it work. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-pipelines/pull/1229#issuecomment-2268789394 > > > > > > > > > > > > It means "Do we want to keep kogito as a part of > quarkus-platform?" > > > > and if > > > > > > the quarkus platform jobs should even exist. > > > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone have thoughts on this? > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Toshiya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Saludos, Enrique González Martínez :) > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
