Hi Gert, It makes sense. Let's move forward with this plan :)
I will work on it during the weekend. Thanks ! Regards JB On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 12:39 AM Gert Vanthienen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Jean-Baptiste, > > Yes, I think it would be better to move forward on the Karaf > integration distribution instead of doing a new ServiceMix release. > Excellent proposal! > > As soon as we have a first release of that new distribution, we can > update the main page and the download page on the website. In the > meanwhile, perhaps we could start with a news item to point people to > the issue for the Karaf integration distribution so they can follow > along with the progress? > > Regards, > > Gert Vanthienen > > > On Sat, Apr 22, 2023 at 6:52 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Hi Gert > > > > That's a fair comment. Few weeks ago I proposed to create a Karaf > > "integration" distribution containing the "equivalent" of SMX. > > > > So, I propose to move forward on the Karaf integration distribution > > and document the "move" in SMX for users. > > > > Thoughts ? > > > > Regards > > JB > > > > On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 3:44 PM Gert Vanthienen > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Jean-Baptiste, > > > > > > We want to start moving people away from ServiceMix and towards Karaf, > > > so I'm not sure we should be doing any new ServiceMix releases. It > > > might make more sense to spend this time and energy on the Karaf side > > > and provide a good alternative there. > > > > > > We could do an integration distribution with Karaf, Camel, CXF, ... > > > prepackaged within the Karaf community. That would probably have to > > > become a subproject, to avoid having the Karaf releases themselves > > > depend on a well-aligned set of ActiveMQ, Camel & CXF releases. That's > > > a discussion that we've had before on the mailing lists, so we could > > > revisit that idea. That does involve quite a bit of work on > > > maintaining the distribution and releasing it regularly, but it would > > > be the most convenient solution for users. > > > > > > Another solution that might work, is just to have a "cookbook" page > > > somewhere in the Karaf documentation where we could document what > > > features to install and where we could keep a list of versions of > > > ActiveMQ, Camel & CXF that work well together. That's probably easier > > > to do and would probably require less time and effort. My personal > > > preference would go to this second solution: working with Karaf > > > features for those three projects has become so much easier over the > > > past few years, that many users are probably already creating their > > > own integration solution that way. > > > > > > We should probably discuss both options further on the Karaf dev list, > > > but either one would give us a way to point people towards Karaf. > > > Instead of doing the new ServiceMix release and adding that to the > > > website, we point users to the first release of the Karaf integration > > > distribution or we point them to the cookbook page where they can > > > discover how to build their own integration container. In both cases, > > > we have taken one more step in the move to Karaf. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Gert Vanthienen > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 7:19 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > Before moving forward on Karaf "move", I propose two actions: > > > > > > > > 1. Rename master branch as main > > > > 2. Prepare SMX 8.0.0 updating dependency versions (using Karaf 4.4.x, > > > > Camel 3.x, ActiveMQ 5.18.x, maybe removing activiti if the update is > > > > not possible) > > > > > > > > Thoughts ? > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > JB
