Freeman,

My plan was to avoid re-releasing components and just keep on using the
2011.02 release for the 4.4.x releases.  Of course, if there are
urgent/critical issues with that release we can still create a maintenance
branch for the components as well, but otherwise I'd keep the bug
fixes/improvements/... for the 2012.01 release and only upgrade the CXF,
Camel, ActiveMQ and Karaf releases inside the features project.

This way, we can deliver a big deal of the value (i.e. the bug fix upgrade
for camel, cxf & co) without having to do a lot of extra work for this
release series.

Wdyt?

Gert Vanthienen
------------------------
FuseSource
Web: http://fusesource.com
Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/


On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 1:16 AM, Freeman Fang <[email protected]>wrote:

> Hi Gert,
>
> Just one thing.
>
> We probably still need another new branch for JBI components project.
> As upgrade from CXF 2.4.x to CXF 2.5.x and from Camel 2.8.x to Camel 2.9.x
> has api changes and hence lots of files in servicemix-cxf and
> servicemix-camel need be updated also, so we can't use same branch to
> maintain both CXF2.5.x/Camel2.9.x and CXF2.4.x/Camel2.8.x.
> I suggest we create a new JBI components branch from release tag, where we
> can keep on CXF2.4.x/Camel 2.8.x path and other fixes(this is for
> Servicemix 4.4.x), and on the JBI components trunk we can upgrade to CXF
> 2.5.x, Camel 2.9.x, ActiveMQ, 5.6.x(this is for Servicemix 4.5.0).
>
> Just my 0.02.
>
> Best Regards
> Freeman
>
> On 2011-12-20, at 下午11:51, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>
>  L.S.,
>>
>>
>> We have a few more hours to go in the Apache ServiceMix 4.4.0 release
>> vote,
>> but unless something pops up last minute, we should have ourselves a brand
>> new ServiceMix release this evening, so it would be good to start thinking
>> about the next releases and make up a plan for those.
>>
>> My proposal would be to schedule 2 upcoming release over the next few
>> months: ServiceMix 4.4.1 and ServiceMix 4.5.0.
>>
>> For ServiceMix 4.4.1, I would like to create a features-4.4.x branch from
>> the current release tag that we can use to upgrade to new minor versions
>> of
>> CXF, Camel, Karaf and ActiveMQ.  There already is a CXF 2.4.5 at the
>> moment
>> and there will no doubt be a Camel 2.8.4 some time as well.  With all the
>> work we did to make our builds more self-contained, it should be possible
>> to upgrade to those new versions without having to recut all the other
>> projects.  If we encounter any packaging issue we can solve in the
>> features
>> build, we can obviously fix those as well but I think we should try to
>> avoid creating branches for everything else (like nmr, components, ...)
>> for
>> this release to keep the maintenance effort reasonable.  We should be able
>> to schedule the 4.4.1 (or any subsequent 4.4.x) release any time we see a
>> substantial new release from those dependencies.
>>
>> In the trunks, I would propose to start working towards ServiceMix 4.5.0,
>> where the plan is to upgrade to the new minor version of our favorite
>> dependencies: CXF 2.5.x, Camel 2.9.x, ActiveMQ, 5.6.x, ...  In the
>> meanwhile, we can obviously also fix some of the outstanding issues that
>> were deferred over the last few weeks but I think we should focus on
>> getting this new release out within a few weeks of the availability of
>> those new CXF/Camel/ActiveMQ/... release.   A common question on the
>> mailing today is 'how can I upgrade ServiceMix to Camel version x or CXF
>> version y' and I think it would be very good if we can answer that
>> question
>> with 'you'll get a new release with those version in a few weeks' ;)
>>
>>
>> Wdyt?
>>
>> Gert Vanthienen
>> ------------------------
>> FuseSource
>> Web: http://fusesource.com
>> Blog: 
>> http://gertvanthienen.**blogspot.com/<http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/>
>>
>
> ------------------------------**---------------
> Freeman Fang
>
> FuseSource
> Email:[email protected]
> Web: fusesource.com
> Twitter: freemanfang
> Blog: http://freemanfang.blogspot.**com <http://freemanfang.blogspot.com>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to