Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
Great ! Seems the discussion is over, so we should now think about executing this plan. Any volunteer ? On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 13:36, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote: Ok, I'm not really convinced, but since it seems there is a lot of reluctance I think we should aim for: * packages in org.apache.felix.karaf * use existing FELIX infrastructure (mailing list, jira tracker, confluence space) I think we should start with the above and reconsider later if there is a need. Is everyone satisfied with the above ? On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:17, Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com wrote: I think we should start with the FELIX infra and then see whether we need to create a new one when the need is there. About the package renaming, I'm in favour of going with org.apache.felix.karaf just because it emphasizes that felix is not about the framework. If we make an exception then this sends a strange message IMO. regards, Karl On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 6:07 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Yes, they do. The definition of a subproject is imho just something controlled by a given TLP. The way its infrastructure is set up has nothing to do with that. A lot of TLP uses multiple JIRA and confluence spaces for different reasons. My point was, this subproject is apparently not going to be treated like any other Felix subproject. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. - richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
I've only copy the smx kernel trunk into felix so far and was waiting for the discussion to settle. We need to address the following tasks: * package renaming (see discussion about blueprint, it might be appropriate to wait a bit or use the branch instead) * move jira issues (i'm not an admin on FELIX jira instance, but if I could be granted that, i could create a component and start moving the issues). I'm experimenting a bit with the CSV import to see if that could help. I guess the other solution is to recreate the existing issues. * move web site. I think this should be easy to move the pages into FELIX using confluence, the next step is then to replace all references from ServiceMix Kernel to Karaf On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 15:59, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/28/09 9:52 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Great ! Seems the discussion is over, so we should now think about executing this plan. Any volunteer ? I thought you were already doing it! :-) - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 13:36, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: Ok, I'm not really convinced, but since it seems there is a lot of reluctance I think we should aim for: * packages in org.apache.felix.karaf * use existing FELIX infrastructure (mailing list, jira tracker, confluence space) I think we should start with the above and reconsider later if there is a need. Is everyone satisfied with the above ? On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:17, Karl Paulskarlpa...@gmail.com wrote: I think we should start with the FELIX infra and then see whether we need to create a new one when the need is there. About the package renaming, I'm in favour of going with org.apache.felix.karaf just because it emphasizes that felix is not about the framework. If we make an exception then this sends a strange message IMO. regards, Karl On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 6:07 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Yes, they do. The definition of a subproject is imho just something controlled by a given TLP. The way its infrastructure is set up has nothing to do with that. A lot of TLP uses multiple JIRA and confluence spaces for different reasons. My point was, this subproject is apparently not going to be treated like any other Felix subproject. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. - richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
On 4/28/09 10:14 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: I've only copy the smx kernel trunk into felix so far and was waiting for the discussion to settle. We need to address the following tasks: * package renaming (see discussion about blueprint, it might be appropriate to wait a bit or use the branch instead) * move jira issues (i'm not an admin on FELIX jira instance, but if I could be granted that, i could create a component and start moving the issues). I'm experimenting a bit with the CSV import to see if that could help. I guess the other solution is to recreate the existing issues. Done. - richard * move web site. I think this should be easy to move the pages into FELIX using confluence, the next step is then to replace all references from ServiceMix Kernel to Karaf On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 15:59, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/28/09 9:52 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Great ! Seems the discussion is over, so we should now think about executing this plan. Any volunteer ? I thought you were already doing it! :-) - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 13:36, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.comwrote: Ok, I'm not really convinced, but since it seems there is a lot of reluctance I think we should aim for: * packages in org.apache.felix.karaf * use existing FELIX infrastructure (mailing list, jira tracker, confluence space) I think we should start with the above and reconsider later if there is a need. Is everyone satisfied with the above ? On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:17, Karl Paulskarlpa...@gmail.comwrote: I think we should start with the FELIX infra and then see whether we need to create a new one when the need is there. About the package renaming, I'm in favour of going with org.apache.felix.karaf just because it emphasizes that felix is not about the framework. If we make an exception then this sends a strange message IMO. regards, Karl On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 6:07 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Yes, they do. The definition of a subproject is imho just something controlled by a given TLP. The way its infrastructure is set up has nothing to do with that. A lot of TLP uses multiple JIRA and confluence spaces for different reasons. My point was, this subproject is apparently not going to be treated like any other Felix subproject. -richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. - richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
I'll do the wiki move in Confluence if I can get admin permissions in the Felix space. I could also do some of the pom.xml refactoring (artifact and groupid, descriptions, etc) as long as it won't affect your blueprint service patch. Chris -- Chris Custine FUSESource :: http://fusesource.com My Blog :: http://blog.organicelement.com Apache ServiceMix :: http://servicemix.apache.org Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 8:14 AM, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote: I've only copy the smx kernel trunk into felix so far and was waiting for the discussion to settle. We need to address the following tasks: * package renaming (see discussion about blueprint, it might be appropriate to wait a bit or use the branch instead) * move jira issues (i'm not an admin on FELIX jira instance, but if I could be granted that, i could create a component and start moving the issues). I'm experimenting a bit with the CSV import to see if that could help. I guess the other solution is to recreate the existing issues. * move web site. I think this should be easy to move the pages into FELIX using confluence, the next step is then to replace all references from ServiceMix Kernel to Karaf On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 15:59, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/28/09 9:52 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Great ! Seems the discussion is over, so we should now think about executing this plan. Any volunteer ? I thought you were already doing it! :-) - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 13:36, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: Ok, I'm not really convinced, but since it seems there is a lot of reluctance I think we should aim for: * packages in org.apache.felix.karaf * use existing FELIX infrastructure (mailing list, jira tracker, confluence space) I think we should start with the above and reconsider later if there is a need. Is everyone satisfied with the above ? On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:17, Karl Paulskarlpa...@gmail.com wrote: I think we should start with the FELIX infra and then see whether we need to create a new one when the need is there. About the package renaming, I'm in favour of going with org.apache.felix.karaf just because it emphasizes that felix is not about the framework. If we make an exception then this sends a strange message IMO. regards, Karl On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 6:07 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Yes, they do. The definition of a subproject is imho just something controlled by a given TLP. The way its infrastructure is set up has nothing to do with that. A lot of TLP uses multiple JIRA and confluence spaces for different reasons. My point was, this subproject is apparently not going to be treated like any other Felix subproject. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. -richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
L.S., If the blueprint stuff is going to settle down pretty soon, we might as well start with Guillaume's branch and target a first release of Karaf with that. From the other post, it seems like a really nice feature to have... That way, we can get started renaming things now -- I guess the effort will only become bigger if we wait longer. Regards, Gert Vanthienen Open Source SOA: http://fusesource.com Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/ 2009/4/28 Chris Custine ccust...@apache.org: I'll do the wiki move in Confluence if I can get admin permissions in the Felix space. I could also do some of the pom.xml refactoring (artifact and groupid, descriptions, etc) as long as it won't affect your blueprint service patch. Chris -- Chris Custine FUSESource :: http://fusesource.com My Blog :: http://blog.organicelement.com Apache ServiceMix :: http://servicemix.apache.org Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 8:14 AM, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote: I've only copy the smx kernel trunk into felix so far and was waiting for the discussion to settle. We need to address the following tasks: * package renaming (see discussion about blueprint, it might be appropriate to wait a bit or use the branch instead) * move jira issues (i'm not an admin on FELIX jira instance, but if I could be granted that, i could create a component and start moving the issues). I'm experimenting a bit with the CSV import to see if that could help. I guess the other solution is to recreate the existing issues. * move web site. I think this should be easy to move the pages into FELIX using confluence, the next step is then to replace all references from ServiceMix Kernel to Karaf On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 15:59, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/28/09 9:52 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Great ! Seems the discussion is over, so we should now think about executing this plan. Any volunteer ? I thought you were already doing it! :-) - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 13:36, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: Ok, I'm not really convinced, but since it seems there is a lot of reluctance I think we should aim for: * packages in org.apache.felix.karaf * use existing FELIX infrastructure (mailing list, jira tracker, confluence space) I think we should start with the above and reconsider later if there is a need. Is everyone satisfied with the above ? On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:17, Karl Paulskarlpa...@gmail.com wrote: I think we should start with the FELIX infra and then see whether we need to create a new one when the need is there. About the package renaming, I'm in favour of going with org.apache.felix.karaf just because it emphasizes that felix is not about the framework. If we make an exception then this sends a strange message IMO. regards, Karl On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 6:07 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Yes, they do. The definition of a subproject is imho just something controlled by a given TLP. The way its infrastructure is set up has nothing to do with that. A lot of TLP uses multiple JIRA and confluence spaces for different reasons. My point was, this subproject is apparently not going to be treated like any other Felix subproject. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. - richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
On 4/28/09 11:34 AM, Chris Custine wrote: I'll do the wiki move in Confluence if I can get admin permissions in the Felix space. Last I knew, I didn't have admin permissions on Confluence (nor do I want it, just extra work. I think Marcel is our Confluence admin go to guy, so maybe he can do the move or help you do it... - richard I could also do some of the pom.xml refactoring (artifact and groupid, descriptions, etc) as long as it won't affect your blueprint service patch. Chris -- Chris Custine FUSESource :: http://fusesource.com My Blog :: http://blog.organicelement.com Apache ServiceMix :: http://servicemix.apache.org Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 8:14 AM, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I've only copy the smx kernel trunk into felix so far and was waiting for the discussion to settle. We need to address the following tasks: * package renaming (see discussion about blueprint, it might be appropriate to wait a bit or use the branch instead) * move jira issues (i'm not an admin on FELIX jira instance, but if I could be granted that, i could create a component and start moving the issues). I'm experimenting a bit with the CSV import to see if that could help. I guess the other solution is to recreate the existing issues. * move web site. I think this should be easy to move the pages into FELIX using confluence, the next step is then to replace all references from ServiceMix Kernel to Karaf On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 15:59, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/28/09 9:52 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Great ! Seems the discussion is over, so we should now think about executing this plan. Any volunteer ? I thought you were already doing it! :-) - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 13:36, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: Ok, I'm not really convinced, but since it seems there is a lot of reluctance I think we should aim for: * packages in org.apache.felix.karaf * use existing FELIX infrastructure (mailing list, jira tracker, confluence space) I think we should start with the above and reconsider later if there is a need. Is everyone satisfied with the above ? On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:17, Karl Paulskarlpa...@gmail.com wrote: I think we should start with the FELIX infra and then see whether we need to create a new one when the need is there. About the package renaming, I'm in favour of going with org.apache.felix.karaf just because it emphasizes that felix is not about the framework. If we make an exception then this sends a strange message IMO. regards, Karl On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 6:07 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Yes, they do. The definition of a subproject is imho just something controlled by a given TLP. The way its infrastructure is set up has nothing to do with that. A lot of TLP uses multiple JIRA and confluence spaces for different reasons. My point was, this subproject is apparently not going to be treated like any other Felix subproject. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. - richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
2009/4/28 Chris Custine ccust...@apache.org: I'll do the wiki move in Confluence if I can get admin permissions in the Felix space. Done I could also do some of the pom.xml refactoring (artifact and groupid, descriptions, etc) as long as it won't affect your blueprint service patch. Chris -- Chris Custine FUSESource :: http://fusesource.com My Blog :: http://blog.organicelement.com Apache ServiceMix :: http://servicemix.apache.org Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 8:14 AM, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote: I've only copy the smx kernel trunk into felix so far and was waiting for the discussion to settle. We need to address the following tasks: * package renaming (see discussion about blueprint, it might be appropriate to wait a bit or use the branch instead) * move jira issues (i'm not an admin on FELIX jira instance, but if I could be granted that, i could create a component and start moving the issues). I'm experimenting a bit with the CSV import to see if that could help. I guess the other solution is to recreate the existing issues. * move web site. I think this should be easy to move the pages into FELIX using confluence, the next step is then to replace all references from ServiceMix Kernel to Karaf On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 15:59, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/28/09 9:52 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Great ! Seems the discussion is over, so we should now think about executing this plan. Any volunteer ? I thought you were already doing it! :-) - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 13:36, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: Ok, I'm not really convinced, but since it seems there is a lot of reluctance I think we should aim for: * packages in org.apache.felix.karaf * use existing FELIX infrastructure (mailing list, jira tracker, confluence space) I think we should start with the above and reconsider later if there is a need. Is everyone satisfied with the above ? On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:17, Karl Paulskarlpa...@gmail.com wrote: I think we should start with the FELIX infra and then see whether we need to create a new one when the need is there. About the package renaming, I'm in favour of going with org.apache.felix.karaf just because it emphasizes that felix is not about the framework. If we make an exception then this sends a strange message IMO. regards, Karl On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 6:07 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Yes, they do. The definition of a subproject is imho just something controlled by a given TLP. The way its infrastructure is set up has nothing to do with that. A lot of TLP uses multiple JIRA and confluence spaces for different reasons. My point was, this subproject is apparently not going to be treated like any other Felix subproject. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. - richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. - richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
Yes, they do. The definition of a subproject is imho just something controlled by a given TLP. The way its infrastructure is set up has nothing to do with that. A lot of TLP uses multiple JIRA and confluence spaces for different reasons. On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. - richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
I think we should start with the FELIX infra and then see whether we need to create a new one when the need is there. About the package renaming, I'm in favour of going with org.apache.felix.karaf just because it emphasizes that felix is not about the framework. If we make an exception then this sends a strange message IMO. regards, Karl On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 6:07 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Yes, they do. The definition of a subproject is imho just something controlled by a given TLP. The way its infrastructure is set up has nothing to do with that. A lot of TLP uses multiple JIRA and confluence spaces for different reasons. My point was, this subproject is apparently not going to be treated like any other Felix subproject. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. - richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
On 4/27/09 6:07 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Yes, they do. The definition of a subproject is imho just something controlled by a given TLP. The way its infrastructure is set up has nothing to do with that. A lot of TLP uses multiple JIRA and confluence spaces for different reasons. My point was, this subproject is apparently not going to be treated like any other Felix subproject. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. - richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.comwrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
I don't have any objections, but I just want to point that making Felix TLP less tied to the Felix framework would imply that the framework can be referred to as something else than Apache Felix imho. The discussion about raising visibility of Felix subprojects has already been raised in the past. I think enhancing the web site is the first thing to do, but the confustion won't go away easily if Apache Felix refers to both the TLP and the runtime. At least, it's difficult to emphazise the fact that subprojects are quite independant of Apache Felix runtime ... I don't have any good proposition so far about that. On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:17, Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com wrote: I think we should start with the FELIX infra and then see whether we need to create a new one when the need is there. About the package renaming, I'm in favour of going with org.apache.felix.karaf just because it emphasizes that felix is not about the framework. If we make an exception then this sends a strange message IMO. regards, Karl On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 6:07 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Yes, they do. The definition of a subproject is imho just something controlled by a given TLP. The way its infrastructure is set up has nothing to do with that. A lot of TLP uses multiple JIRA and confluence spaces for different reasons. My point was, this subproject is apparently not going to be treated like any other Felix subproject. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. - richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
Agreed. If the traffic becomes too much, we can reconsider this option later without much impact. I'm more concerned about the package name / jira instance which impacts compatibility / tracability if changed. On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 13:01, Stuart McCulloch mccu...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/4/27 Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com As James mentioned in the other thread, subprojects may also have dedicated mailing lists that are usually in xxx-...@tlp.apache.org / xxx-us...@tlp.apache.org ... the downside of separate lists is that this severely reduces the possible interaction between sub-project communities - I'd really like to continue with just the top-level dev/users lists until there was a pressing need to keep them separate... otherwise as Richard says, this doesn't feel part of the Felix community On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. - richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Cheers, Stuart -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
2009/4/27 Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com As James mentioned in the other thread, subprojects may also have dedicated mailing lists that are usually in xxx-...@tlp.apache.org / xxx-us...@tlp.apache.org ... the downside of separate lists is that this severely reduces the possible interaction between sub-project communities - I'd really like to continue with just the top-level dev/users lists until there was a pressing need to keep them separate... otherwise as Richard says, this doesn't feel part of the Felix community On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. - richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Cheers, Stuart
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
As James mentioned in the other thread, subprojects may also have dedicated mailing lists that are usually in xxx-...@tlp.apache.org / xxx-us...@tlp.apache.org ... On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. - richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
Ok, I'm not really convinced, but since it seems there is a lot of reluctance I think we should aim for: * packages in org.apache.felix.karaf * use existing FELIX infrastructure (mailing list, jira tracker, confluence space) I think we should start with the above and reconsider later if there is a need. Is everyone satisfied with the above ? On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:17, Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com wrote: I think we should start with the FELIX infra and then see whether we need to create a new one when the need is there. About the package renaming, I'm in favour of going with org.apache.felix.karaf just because it emphasizes that felix is not about the framework. If we make an exception then this sends a strange message IMO. regards, Karl On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 6:07 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Yes, they do. The definition of a subproject is imho just something controlled by a given TLP. The way its infrastructure is set up has nothing to do with that. A lot of TLP uses multiple JIRA and confluence spaces for different reasons. My point was, this subproject is apparently not going to be treated like any other Felix subproject. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. - richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
2009/4/27 Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com Ok, I'm not really convinced, but since it seems there is a lot of reluctance I think we should aim for: * packages in org.apache.felix.karaf * use existing FELIX infrastructure (mailing list, jira tracker, confluence space) I think we should start with the above and reconsider later if there is a need. Is everyone satisfied with the above ? fine with me (fwiw, I don't mind so much about the package name convention) On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:17, Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com wrote: I think we should start with the FELIX infra and then see whether we need to create a new one when the need is there. About the package renaming, I'm in favour of going with org.apache.felix.karaf just because it emphasizes that felix is not about the framework. If we make an exception then this sends a strange message IMO. regards, Karl On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 6:07 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Yes, they do. The definition of a subproject is imho just something controlled by a given TLP. The way its infrastructure is set up has nothing to do with that. A lot of TLP uses multiple JIRA and confluence spaces for different reasons. My point was, this subproject is apparently not going to be treated like any other Felix subproject. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. - richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Cheers, Stuart
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
Sounds good to me. regards, Karl On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Stuart McCulloch mccu...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/4/27 Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com Ok, I'm not really convinced, but since it seems there is a lot of reluctance I think we should aim for: * packages in org.apache.felix.karaf * use existing FELIX infrastructure (mailing list, jira tracker, confluence space) I think we should start with the above and reconsider later if there is a need. Is everyone satisfied with the above ? fine with me (fwiw, I don't mind so much about the package name convention) On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:17, Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com wrote: I think we should start with the FELIX infra and then see whether we need to create a new one when the need is there. About the package renaming, I'm in favour of going with org.apache.felix.karaf just because it emphasizes that felix is not about the framework. If we make an exception then this sends a strange message IMO. regards, Karl On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 6:07 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Yes, they do. The definition of a subproject is imho just something controlled by a given TLP. The way its infrastructure is set up has nothing to do with that. A lot of TLP uses multiple JIRA and confluence spaces for different reasons. My point was, this subproject is apparently not going to be treated like any other Felix subproject. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. - richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Cheers, Stuart -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
Guillaume Nodet wrote: Ok, I'm not really convinced, but since it seems there is a lot of reluctance I think we should aim for: * packages in org.apache.felix.karaf * use existing FELIX infrastructure (mailing list, jira tracker, confluence space) I think we should start with the above and reconsider later if there is a need. Is everyone satisfied with the above ? +1 Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler cziege...@apache.org
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
On 4/27/09 7:36 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Ok, I'm not really convinced, but since it seems there is a lot of reluctance I think we should aim for: * packages in org.apache.felix.karaf * use existing FELIX infrastructure (mailing list, jira tracker, confluence space) I think we should start with the above and reconsider later if there is a need. Is everyone satisfied with the above ? I think this sounds fine. My main concern was that the reason for moving to Felix was to focus the community on it, thus it seemed strange to then try to make it completely separate in approach, mailing lists, infrastructure, etc., since that approach could have been done at ServiceMix and achieved the same result, I would think. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:17, Karl Paulskarlpa...@gmail.com wrote: I think we should start with the FELIX infra and then see whether we need to create a new one when the need is there. About the package renaming, I'm in favour of going with org.apache.felix.karaf just because it emphasizes that felix is not about the framework. If we make an exception then this sends a strange message IMO. regards, Karl On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 6:07 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Yes, they do. The definition of a subproject is imho just something controlled by a given TLP. The way its infrastructure is set up has nothing to do with that. A lot of TLP uses multiple JIRA and confluence spaces for different reasons. My point was, this subproject is apparently not going to be treated like any other Felix subproject. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. -richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cphttps://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog:http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
On 4/27/09 7:02 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: I don't have any objections, but I just want to point that making Felix TLP less tied to the Felix framework would imply that the framework can be referred to as something else than Apache Felix imho. The discussion about raising visibility of Felix subprojects has already been raised in the past. I think enhancing the web site is the first thing to do, but the confustion won't go away easily if Apache Felix refers to both the TLP and the runtime. At least, it's difficult to emphazise the fact that subprojects are quite independant of Apache Felix runtime ... I don't have any good proposition so far about that. Agreed. It really is the Apache Felix Framework and I do call it that on occasion when I want to stress the point, but you are right that it normally gets shortened to just Apache Felix when referring only to the framework. Who volunteered to take a stab at rearranging the web site? I think that would be a good step in the right direction. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:17, Karl Paulskarlpa...@gmail.com wrote: I think we should start with the FELIX infra and then see whether we need to create a new one when the need is there. About the package renaming, I'm in favour of going with org.apache.felix.karaf just because it emphasizes that felix is not about the framework. If we make an exception then this sends a strange message IMO. regards, Karl On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 6:07 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Yes, they do. The definition of a subproject is imho just something controlled by a given TLP. The way its infrastructure is set up has nothing to do with that. A lot of TLP uses multiple JIRA and confluence spaces for different reasons. My point was, this subproject is apparently not going to be treated like any other Felix subproject. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. -richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
I'm fine with the agreed upon approach, but I also wanted to clarify some of what Guillaume originally proposed because I never saw any of this mentioned in this thread. Within ServiceMix we had already split Kernel/Karaf and other larger parts of our project (components, NMR, etc.) into separate standalone SVN, Jira, and Wiki projects. We mainly did this as a result of some painful growth experiences with maintainting documentation, multiple concurrent releases (bugfix branches vs major releases), increased user traffic, and various other issues that were encountered with having a large monolithic project structure with dozens of subprojects. I think ServiceMix and Felix are somewhat unique among Apache projects in that each has already fostered a rather large ecosystem of related sub-projects or components that have a lifecycle all their own. I don't think anyone has found a perfect solution within our (Apache) infrastructure, but I wouldn't worry about fragmenting a community because on development infrastructure organization choices. I think the essence of a well established community is largely unaffected by the organization and naming of code and artifacts Sorry for being late to the discussion, but I wanted to add my 2 cents. I think the most important thing is to keep moving forward so +1 for the current plan, and we can always reevaluate down the road if this thing takes off like we think it will. Cheers, Chris -- Chris Custine FUSESource :: http://fusesource.com My Blog :: http://blog.organicelement.com Apache ServiceMix :: http://servicemix.apache.org Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.orgwrote: On 4/27/09 7:36 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Ok, I'm not really convinced, but since it seems there is a lot of reluctance I think we should aim for: * packages in org.apache.felix.karaf * use existing FELIX infrastructure (mailing list, jira tracker, confluence space) I think we should start with the above and reconsider later if there is a need. Is everyone satisfied with the above ? I think this sounds fine. My main concern was that the reason for moving to Felix was to focus the community on it, thus it seemed strange to then try to make it completely separate in approach, mailing lists, infrastructure, etc., since that approach could have been done at ServiceMix and achieved the same result, I would think. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:17, Karl Paulskarlpa...@gmail.com wrote: I think we should start with the FELIX infra and then see whether we need to create a new one when the need is there. About the package renaming, I'm in favour of going with org.apache.felix.karaf just because it emphasizes that felix is not about the framework. If we make an exception then this sends a strange message IMO. regards, Karl On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 6:07 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Yes, they do. The definition of a subproject is imho just something controlled by a given TLP. The way its infrastructure is set up has nothing to do with that. A lot of TLP uses multiple JIRA and confluence spaces for different reasons. My point was, this subproject is apparently not going to be treated like any other Felix subproject. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces. And is this how other projects do it too? It seems this is a subproject in name only. -richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:26, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command:
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
Well, I certainly don't know which approach is best. So far, I don't think we have run into too much difficulty with our all-in-one approach. At least it doesn't seem like there is an enormous amount of unrelated traffic. We shall see if this takes us to a new level. - richard On 4/27/09 11:40 AM, Chris Custine wrote: I'm fine with the agreed upon approach, but I also wanted to clarify some of what Guillaume originally proposed because I never saw any of this mentioned in this thread. Within ServiceMix we had already split Kernel/Karaf and other larger parts of our project (components, NMR, etc.) into separate standalone SVN, Jira, and Wiki projects. We mainly did this as a result of some painful growth experiences with maintainting documentation, multiple concurrent releases (bugfix branches vs major releases), increased user traffic, and various other issues that were encountered with having a large monolithic project structure with dozens of subprojects. I think ServiceMix and Felix are somewhat unique among Apache projects in that each has already fostered a rather large ecosystem of related sub-projects or components that have a lifecycle all their own. I don't think anyone has found a perfect solution within our (Apache) infrastructure, but I wouldn't worry about fragmenting a community because on development infrastructure organization choices. I think the essence of a well established community is largely unaffected by the organization and naming of code and artifacts Sorry for being late to the discussion, but I wanted to add my 2 cents. I think the most important thing is to keep moving forward so +1 for the current plan, and we can always reevaluate down the road if this thing takes off like we think it will. Cheers, Chris -- Chris Custine FUSESource :: http://fusesource.com My Blog :: http://blog.organicelement.com Apache ServiceMix :: http://servicemix.apache.org Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.orgwrote: On 4/27/09 7:36 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Ok, I'm not really convinced, but since it seems there is a lot of reluctance I think we should aim for: * packages in org.apache.felix.karaf * use existing FELIX infrastructure (mailing list, jira tracker, confluence space) I think we should start with the above and reconsider later if there is a need. Is everyone satisfied with the above ? I think this sounds fine. My main concern was that the reason for moving to Felix was to focus the community on it, thus it seemed strange to then try to make it completely separate in approach, mailing lists, infrastructure, etc., since that approach could have been done at ServiceMix and achieved the same result, I would think. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:17, Karl Paulskarlpa...@gmail.com wrote: I think we should start with the FELIX infra and then see whether we need to create a new one when the need is there. About the package renaming, I'm in favour of going with org.apache.felix.karaf just because it emphasizes that felix is not about the framework. If we make an exception then this sends a strange message IMO. regards, Karl On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 6:07 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Yes, they do. The definition of a subproject is imho just something controlled by a given TLP. The way its infrastructure is set up has nothing to do with that. A lot of TLP uses multiple JIRA and confluence spaces for different reasons. My point was, this subproject is apparently not going to be treated like any other Felix subproject. - richard On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:03, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/27/09 5:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: It seems the consensus for the code is to move it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/karaf So i'll go ahead and move the servicemix kernel trunk there asap. We still need to settle the problems of: * package name: org.apache.karaf vs org.apache.felix.karaf * jira issue tracker: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one * web site: use FELIX or create a new KARAF one The package renaming to org.apache.karaf has raised a number of concerns, mostly (correct me if i'm wrong) about the fact whether this would be frowned upong by the ASF or not. Given the number of subprojects that do that since a long time, I think the answer is no. Now we need to decide if we want to do this or not. For the issue tracker and web site, I think this is somewhat related to the package renaming issue above, though the problem is a bit different. I'm really opened here, but if we choose to rename the packages to org.apache.karaf, it think it would make more sense to have dedicated JIRA and confluence spaces.
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 7:01 AM, Stuart McCulloch mccu...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/4/27 Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com As James mentioned in the other thread, subprojects may also have dedicated mailing lists that are usually in xxx-...@tlp.apache.org / xxx-us...@tlp.apache.org ... the downside of separate lists is that this severely reduces the possible interaction between sub-project communities - I'd really like to continue with just the top-level dev/users lists until there was a pressing need to keep them separate... +1 my thoughts exactly. I also favor the o.a.f.karaf package name instead of o.a.k. Karaf should comply with the same patterns followed by other subproject. The other option is to directly have Karaf apply to become a TLP. Alex
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
L.S., From what I read so far, I'm definitely +1 on going with org.apache.karaf as a package name. BTW, just shout if you need an extra hand for the package rename operation. For the JIRA, I agree with Guillaume that a bulk move operation won't work between different instances. The only thing we can do to ease the effort somehow is export the issues to e.g. CSV and do an import in the target JIRA. While I can help out with preparing the CSV file, I don't have admin rights on the target JIRA so we'd need someone to do the import. Couldn't we make the ServiceMix Kernel JIRA read-only/hidden for now and provide a link back to the original issues for looking up comments, creators, watchers, ...? Regards, Gert Vanthienen Open Source SOA: http://fusesource.com Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/ 2009/4/25 Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com: On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 00:14, Marcel Offermans marcel.offerm...@luminis.nl wrote: On Apr 24, 2009, at 23:45 , Felix Meschberger wrote: Marcel Offermans schrieb: About JIRA, I don't think trying to migrate the current issues makes a lot of sense. There really aren't any good tools for that as far as I know. I could live with Karaf sticking with the current JIRA or perhaps slowly migrating towards the Felix JIRA (but only for new issues, leave existing ones where they are now). Hmm, I think migration of the issues from one project to another is a trivial thing in JIRA. We would have to watch out for assigned components/versions, but basically it is not that complicated. That's good to know. Does that include people who have created an account in JIRA and are watching specific issues? Unfortunately, this only work inside the same JIRA instance. The current jira issues are hosted at: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/SMX4KNL whereas felix is at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX So I don't think we'll be able to move the issues at all. It's only possible to move them to another project hosted on the same instance :-( And: it is only for the open issues. We probably don't want to move the closed ones, just like we probably don't move the past releases, tags and branches Agreed. We don't have too many opened issues right now (36 actually) so it may be doable to recreate them, but we'll loose creator / watchers / comments if any. Greetings, Marcel -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
[Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
+1, We will have to update Karaf pom file point on the Felix parent pom file, and update groupid ... Regards, Clement On 24.04.2009, at 09:26, Guillaume Nodet wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf That should be .../felix/trunk/karaf no? I think it would be confusing to put it along-side the trunk... regards, Karl Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
I think I'd prefer to only move your trunk to felix/trunk/karaf and start from there. regards, Karl On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote: That was the main question. Moving the whole trunk/tags/branches allows to keep the release tags, but moving only trunk would be more inlined with the current felix structure. Not sure about the release tags in this case (i guess we can leave those in smx and just not import them). On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:38, Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf That should be .../felix/trunk/karaf no? I think it would be confusing to put it along-side the trunk... regards, Karl Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
That was the main question. Moving the whole trunk/tags/branches allows to keep the release tags, but moving only trunk would be more inlined with the current felix structure. Not sure about the release tags in this case (i guess we can leave those in smx and just not import them). On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:38, Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf That should be .../felix/trunk/karaf no? I think it would be confusing to put it along-side the trunk... regards, Karl Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
Yes, it should be moved to trunk. We cannot base decisions on where to put stuff with respect to size or other criteria, that doesn't really make sense. We have subprojects, they go in trunk. That's all. Also, I think your package name would have to be org.apache.felix.karaf. I think this would be the rule, likewise it is not Apache Karaf, it is Apache Felix Karaf. Otherwise, the implication is that it is a top-level Apache project. Of course, I don't care and if the Apache rules allow it, then I guess we can debate it. - richard On 4/24/09 6:02 AM, Karl Pauls wrote: I think I'd prefer to only move your trunk to felix/trunk/karaf and start from there. regards, Karl On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: That was the main question. Moving the whole trunk/tags/branches allows to keep the release tags, but moving only trunk would be more inlined with the current felix structure. Not sure about the release tags in this case (i guess we can leave those in smx and just not import them). On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:38, Karl Paulskarlpa...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf That should be .../felix/trunk/karaf no? I think it would be confusing to put it along-side the trunk... regards, Karl Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
Richard S. Hall wrote: Yes, it should be moved to trunk. We cannot base decisions on where to put stuff with respect to size or other criteria, that doesn't really make sense. We have subprojects, they go in trunk. That's all. Yepp, it should go to trunk and as Karl suggested only current trunk of Karaf should be moved here. Also, I think your package name would have to be org.apache.felix.karaf. I think this would be the rule, likewise it is not Apache Karaf, it is Apache Felix Karaf. Otherwise, the implication is that it is a top-level Apache project. Of course, I don't care and if the Apache rules allow it, then I guess we can debate it. Hmm, I'm not sure if there are any rules. Afaik we can use any package names we want (of course if it makes sense). There are other projects at Apache which use different package names than their top level project name (xbean from Geronimo being the most prominent). And they also call it Apache XBean (http://geronimo.apache.org/xbean/index.html). So I think as long as we don't clash with anything existing, we're fine. The question is: what is the better option of the two? If we're pretty sure that this will become TLP later on, using just Karaf (Apache Karaf, org.apache.karaf) seems right - if we're unsure adding Felix to the name, package makes more sense. Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler cziege...@apache.org
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
Richard S. Hall wrote: Yes, it should be moved to trunk. We cannot base decisions on where to put stuff with respect to size or other criteria, that doesn't really make sense. We have subprojects, they go in trunk. That's all. Yepp, it should go to trunk and as Karl suggested only current trunk of Karaf should be moved here. Also, I think your package name would have to be org.apache.felix.karaf. I think this would be the rule, likewise it is not Apache Karaf, it is Apache Felix Karaf. Otherwise, the implication is that it is a top-level Apache project. Of course, I don't care and if the Apache rules allow it, then I guess we can debate it. Hmm, I'm not sure if there are any rules. Afaik we can use any package names we want (of course if it makes sense). There are other projects at Apache which use different package names than their top level project name (xbean from Geronimo being the most prominent). And they also call it Apache XBean (http://geronimo.apache.org/xbean/index.html). So I think as long as we don't clash with anything existing, we're fine. The question is: what is the better option of the two? If we're pretty sure that this will become TLP later on, using just Karaf (Apache Karaf, org.apache.karaf) seems right - if we're unsure adding Felix to the name, package makes more sense. For now I would go with Apache Felix Karaf and org.apache.felix.karaf even if this would mean to rename things once Karaf gets TLP (although even then renaming of the packages would not be required). Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler cziege...@apache.org
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
I'd say the most known use case is axis, where all packages are org.apache.axis(2) and still is a subproject of web services. The list includes most of the webservices TLP, mina subprojects, etc... I'd rather go with org.apache.karaf myself. It would avoid any required renaming if ever going to TLP (I can see subprojects being org.apache.xxx, but i don't really see a TLP using org.apache.anothertlp.xxx). And unless we use the existing felix resources (jira, confluence, etc...) it would be more consistent. Most of the big subprojects have their own mailing list too. I don't really think we need this at this point, but my point is just to express the fact that subprojects can have a real identity. I think it mostly depends on the size of the subprojectm and my thinking is that Karaf is big enough to deserve its own identity, even as a subproject. On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 13:30, Carsten Ziegeler cziege...@apache.org wrote: Richard S. Hall wrote: Yes, it should be moved to trunk. We cannot base decisions on where to put stuff with respect to size or other criteria, that doesn't really make sense. We have subprojects, they go in trunk. That's all. Yepp, it should go to trunk and as Karl suggested only current trunk of Karaf should be moved here. Also, I think your package name would have to be org.apache.felix.karaf. I think this would be the rule, likewise it is not Apache Karaf, it is Apache Felix Karaf. Otherwise, the implication is that it is a top-level Apache project. Of course, I don't care and if the Apache rules allow it, then I guess we can debate it. Hmm, I'm not sure if there are any rules. Afaik we can use any package names we want (of course if it makes sense). There are other projects at Apache which use different package names than their top level project name (xbean from Geronimo being the most prominent). And they also call it Apache XBean (http://geronimo.apache.org/xbean/index.html). So I think as long as we don't clash with anything existing, we're fine. The question is: what is the better option of the two? If we're pretty sure that this will become TLP later on, using just Karaf (Apache Karaf, org.apache.karaf) seems right - if we're unsure adding Felix to the name, package makes more sense. For now I would go with Apache Felix Karaf and org.apache.felix.karaf even if this would mean to rename things once Karaf gets TLP (although even then renaming of the packages would not be required). Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler cziege...@apache.org -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
Guillaume Nodet wrote: I'd say the most known use case is axis, where all packages are org.apache.axis(2) and still is a subproject of web services. The list includes most of the webservices TLP, mina subprojects, etc... Args, yes, I tend to forget all this WS stuff :) I'd rather go with org.apache.karaf myself. I'm not against this - I'm just not sure what the better option is :) It would avoid any required renaming if ever going to TLP (I can see subprojects being org.apache.xxx, but i don't really see a TLP using org.apache.anothertlp.xxx). And unless we use the existing felix resources (jira, confluence, etc...) it would be more consistent. Hmm, right if Karaf is using it's own jira, confluence etc...hmm... Most of the big subprojects have their own mailing list too. I don't really think we need this at this point, but my point is just to express the fact that subprojects can have a real identity. I think it mostly depends on the size of the subprojectm and my thinking is that Karaf is big enough to deserve its own identity, even as a subproject. I tend to agree here. And we are used to this already, everyone speaks about Apache iPojo, but I've never seen Apache Felix iPojo. Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler cziege...@apache.org
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
And rename all packages to org.apache.karaf There's lot of work to be done ... On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:32, Clement Escoffier clement.escoff...@gmail.com wrote: +1, We will have to update Karaf pom file point on the Felix parent pom file, and update groupid ... Regards, Clement On 24.04.2009, at 09:26, Guillaume Nodet wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
According to svn convention anything that releases on it's own needs it's own trunk/tags/branches structure. Do we intended to have Karaf released with felix everytime? Should a need to release Karaf require us to release Felix? Perhaps Karaf should have it's own release schedule. Like if there is a critical bug that forces an immediate release in Karaf should not force an unnecessary release of Felix. We might need to reconsider our svn structure to make subprojects more nimble without inconveniencing other subprojects. Just some thoughts. Regards. On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 6:02 AM, Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com wrote: I think I'd prefer to only move your trunk to felix/trunk/karaf and start from there. regards, Karl On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote: That was the main question. Moving the whole trunk/tags/branches allows to keep the release tags, but moving only trunk would be more inlined with the current felix structure. Not sure about the release tags in this case (i guess we can leave those in smx and just not import them). On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:38, Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf That should be .../felix/trunk/karaf no? I think it would be confusing to put it along-side the trunk... regards, Karl Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com -- Alex Karasulu My Blog :: http://www.jroller.com/akarasulu/ Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org Apache MINA :: http://mina.apache.org
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
Currently, each subproject has its own lifecycle, but they share the same trunk / tags. I.e. when you release a subproject, you don't release everything, but just copy the subproject subtree into the main tags tree. It works and does not imply that you have to release everything at the same time. FWIW, I remember talking with the maven guys and they were considering to change the way the have organized the plugins (they currently also share the same trunk/tags) to use separate trunk/tags/branches for each plugin. Anyway, I think this is a different debate and both can work. I think it might be better to follow the existing conventions in Felix for Karaf, and reconsider using a separate svn tree for each subproject if the need arise. On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 15:48, Alex Karasulu akaras...@gmail.com wrote: According to svn convention anything that releases on it's own needs it's own trunk/tags/branches structure. Do we intended to have Karaf released with felix everytime? Should a need to release Karaf require us to release Felix? Perhaps Karaf should have it's own release schedule. Like if there is a critical bug that forces an immediate release in Karaf should not force an unnecessary release of Felix. We might need to reconsider our svn structure to make subprojects more nimble without inconveniencing other subprojects. Just some thoughts. Regards. On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 6:02 AM, Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com wrote: I think I'd prefer to only move your trunk to felix/trunk/karaf and start from there. regards, Karl On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote: That was the main question. Moving the whole trunk/tags/branches allows to keep the release tags, but moving only trunk would be more inlined with the current felix structure. Not sure about the release tags in this case (i guess we can leave those in smx and just not import them). On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:38, Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Guillaume Nodet gno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf That should be .../felix/trunk/karaf no? I think it would be confusing to put it along-side the trunk... regards, Karl Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com -- Alex Karasulu My Blog :: http://www.jroller.com/akarasulu/ Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org Apache MINA :: http://mina.apache.org -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
On 4/24/09 7:40 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: I'd say the most known use case is axis, where all packages are org.apache.axis(2) and still is a subproject of web services. The list includes most of the webservices TLP, mina subprojects, etc... I'd rather go with org.apache.karaf myself. It would avoid any required renaming if ever going to TLP (I can see subprojects being org.apache.xxx, but i don't really see a TLP using org.apache.anothertlp.xxx). And unless we use the existing felix resources (jira, confluence, etc...) it would be more consistent. Most of the big subprojects have their own mailing list too. I don't really think we need this at this point, but my point is just to express the fact that subprojects can have a real identity. I think it mostly depends on the size of the subprojectm and my thinking is that Karaf is big enough to deserve its own identity, even as a subproject. Well, certainly, up until now, all of our subprojects do share everything (e.g., mailing list, different components in JIRA), so that is definitely not an issue now. When it becomes an issue, then the TLP discussion will probably be the next step for sure. Anyway, my concern here is not over what we want to do, but what we should do from an Apache process perspective. I don't want Felix (the project) creating some firestorm by being seen as implicitly promoting subprojects to TLP. - richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 13:30, Carsten Ziegelercziege...@apache.org wrote: Richard S. Hall wrote: Yes, it should be moved to trunk. We cannot base decisions on where to put stuff with respect to size or other criteria, that doesn't really make sense. We have subprojects, they go in trunk. That's all. Yepp, it should go to trunk and as Karl suggested only current trunk of Karaf should be moved here. Also, I think your package name would have to be org.apache.felix.karaf. I think this would be the rule, likewise it is not Apache Karaf, it is Apache Felix Karaf. Otherwise, the implication is that it is a top-level Apache project. Of course, I don't care and if the Apache rules allow it, then I guess we can debate it. Hmm, I'm not sure if there are any rules. Afaik we can use any package names we want (of course if it makes sense). There are other projects at Apache which use different package names than their top level project name (xbean from Geronimo being the most prominent). And they also call it Apache XBean (http://geronimo.apache.org/xbean/index.html). So I think as long as we don't clash with anything existing, we're fine. The question is: what is the better option of the two? If we're pretty sure that this will become TLP later on, using just Karaf (Apache Karaf, org.apache.karaf) seems right - if we're unsure adding Felix to the name, package makes more sense. For now I would go with Apache Felix Karaf and org.apache.felix.karaf even if this would mean to rename things once Karaf gets TLP (although even then renaming of the packages would not be required). Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler cziege...@apache.org
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
Yes, I don't think the trunk structure has anything to do with the release cycle. - richard On 4/24/09 9:57 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: Currently, each subproject has its own lifecycle, but they share the same trunk / tags. I.e. when you release a subproject, you don't release everything, but just copy the subproject subtree into the main tags tree. It works and does not imply that you have to release everything at the same time. FWIW, I remember talking with the maven guys and they were considering to change the way the have organized the plugins (they currently also share the same trunk/tags) to use separate trunk/tags/branches for each plugin. Anyway, I think this is a different debate and both can work. I think it might be better to follow the existing conventions in Felix for Karaf, and reconsider using a separate svn tree for each subproject if the need arise. On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 15:48, Alex Karasuluakaras...@gmail.com wrote: According to svn convention anything that releases on it's own needs it's own trunk/tags/branches structure. Do we intended to have Karaf released with felix everytime? Should a need to release Karaf require us to release Felix? Perhaps Karaf should have it's own release schedule. Like if there is a critical bug that forces an immediate release in Karaf should not force an unnecessary release of Felix. We might need to reconsider our svn structure to make subprojects more nimble without inconveniencing other subprojects. Just some thoughts. Regards. On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 6:02 AM, Karl Paulskarlpa...@gmail.com wrote: I think I'd prefer to only move your trunk to felix/trunk/karaf and start from there. regards, Karl On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: That was the main question. Moving the whole trunk/tags/branches allows to keep the release tags, but moving only trunk would be more inlined with the current felix structure. Not sure about the release tags in this case (i guess we can leave those in smx and just not import them). On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 09:38, Karl Paulskarlpa...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Guillaume Nodetgno...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to start moving the ServiceMix Kernel code into Felix now. Given the size of the code base, I think it would be better to just move the tree into its own top level svn structure. I'd like to run the following command: svn cp https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/kernel https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/karaf That should be .../felix/trunk/karaf no? I think it would be confusing to put it along-side the trunk... regards, Karl Any objections in doing that ? Next steps will include creating a JIRA project and moving all the issues into it (with a KARAF id), then the confluence space. -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com -- Karl Pauls karlpa...@gmail.com -- Alex Karasulu My Blog :: http://www.jroller.com/akarasulu/ Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org Apache MINA :: http://mina.apache.org
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
On 24.04.2009, at 13:55, Carsten Ziegeler wrote: And we are used to this already, everyone speaks about Apache iPojo, but I've never seen Apache Felix iPojo. Did it become a TLP ??? No, it's always Apache Felix iPOJO. If you look at the web site, it is never mentioned Apache iPOJO. Moreover, iPOJO artifacts use the org.apache.felix groupid. and contains always the Felix reference. Clement
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
Richard S. Hall wrote: On 4/24/09 7:55 AM, Carsten Ziegeler wrote: And we are used to this already, everyone speaks about Apache iPojo, but I've never seen Apache Felix iPojo. That is completely false. Look at our subproject page: Great, I stand corrected :) But people outside of Apache refer to it as Apache iPojo :) - ok, you can't teach everyone and people usually just say Felix although it's Apache Felix etc. Of course, I accept we can make a different decision in this case, but I just want to be clear that I have certainly tried to be precise up until now that our subprojects are part of Apache Felix. Otherwise, why don't we create org.apache.log, org.apache.ipojo, org.apache.http, org.apache.upnp... Good point; actually I was thinking about this for iPojo..äh..Apache Felix iPojo for some minutes. So how do we get this resolved quickly? A majority vote? Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler cziege...@apache.org
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
Clement Escoffier wrote: On 24.04.2009, at 13:55, Carsten Ziegeler wrote: And we are used to this already, everyone speaks about Apache iPojo, but I've never seen Apache Felix iPojo. Did it become a TLP ??? Yes on April 1st. No, it's always Apache Felix iPOJO. If you look at the web site, it is never mentioned Apache iPOJO. Moreover, iPOJO artifacts use the org.apache.felix groupid. and contains always the Felix reference. Yeah I know that :) I was more talking about the use of the name outside of this mailing list; but I think that's a different issue. So everything is perfect with iPojo. Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler cziege...@apache.org
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
On Apr 24, 2009, at 16:13 , Carsten Ziegeler wrote: So how do we get this resolved quickly? A majority vote? I'm in favor of treating Karaf like any other existing subproject in Felix for now, because I value consistency here. Treating subprojects within Felix in a different way is another issue, which should be dealt with separately. However, I can imagine that with Karaf already having some history at ServiceMix, changing package names (or bundle symbolic names) has certain implications on compatibility, and that might be a good reason to deviate from the standard in certain places. Greetings, Marcel
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
On Apr 24, 2009, at 10:05 AM, Richard S. Hall wrote: Anyway, my concern here is not over what we want to do, but what we should do from an Apache process perspective. I don't want Felix (the project) creating some firestorm by being seen as implicitly promoting subprojects to TLP. Using Lucene/Hadoop as examples, their sub-projects don't necessarily include 'lucene' or 'hadoop' in their package names. So I think its entirely reasonable to have org.apache.karaf -pete -- pro...@apache.org - http://fotap.org/~osi smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
Btw, MOSGi is denoting a bit ... On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 16:02, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/24/09 7:55 AM, Carsten Ziegeler wrote: And we are used to this already, everyone speaks about Apache iPojo, but I've never seen Apache Felix iPojo. That is completely false. Look at our subproject page: http://felix.apache.org/site/subprojects.html Everything there is Apache Felix XXX, including iPOJO. Ask Clement, I have corrected him on this numerous times when we first got started. It is either iPOJO or Apache Felix iPOJO, but never Apache iPOJO. If so, it is a mistake. Of course, I accept we can make a different decision in this case, but I just want to be clear that I have certainly tried to be precise up until now that our subprojects are part of Apache Felix. Otherwise, why don't we create org.apache.log, org.apache.ipojo, org.apache.http, org.apache.upnp... - richard Carsten -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
If we rename packages, everything will be broken for sure. I'd be pleased not to do that too often ;-) I don't see karaf packages staying org.apache.servicemix.kernel either ... Does your consistency includes jira and confluence ? Meaning we'd move existing issues (at least those still open) and the current web site into the FELIX jira and confluence spaces ? On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 18:24, Marcel Offermans marcel.offerm...@luminis.nl wrote: On Apr 24, 2009, at 16:13 , Carsten Ziegeler wrote: So how do we get this resolved quickly? A majority vote? I'm in favor of treating Karaf like any other existing subproject in Felix for now, because I value consistency here. Treating subprojects within Felix in a different way is another issue, which should be dealt with separately. However, I can imagine that with Karaf already having some history at ServiceMix, changing package names (or bundle symbolic names) has certain implications on compatibility, and that might be a good reason to deviate from the standard in certain places. Greetings, Marcel -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
Given the tons of existing subprojects not using their TLP name in their package name, I don't think this is an issue at all. On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 16:05, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/24/09 7:40 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: I'd say the most known use case is axis, where all packages are org.apache.axis(2) and still is a subproject of web services. The list includes most of the webservices TLP, mina subprojects, etc... I'd rather go with org.apache.karaf myself. It would avoid any required renaming if ever going to TLP (I can see subprojects being org.apache.xxx, but i don't really see a TLP using org.apache.anothertlp.xxx). And unless we use the existing felix resources (jira, confluence, etc...) it would be more consistent. Most of the big subprojects have their own mailing list too. I don't really think we need this at this point, but my point is just to express the fact that subprojects can have a real identity. I think it mostly depends on the size of the subprojectm and my thinking is that Karaf is big enough to deserve its own identity, even as a subproject. Well, certainly, up until now, all of our subprojects do share everything (e.g., mailing list, different components in JIRA), so that is definitely not an issue now. When it becomes an issue, then the TLP discussion will probably be the next step for sure. Anyway, my concern here is not over what we want to do, but what we should do from an Apache process perspective. I don't want Felix (the project) creating some firestorm by being seen as implicitly promoting subprojects to TLP. - richard On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 13:30, Carsten Ziegelercziege...@apache.org wrote: Richard S. Hall wrote: Yes, it should be moved to trunk. We cannot base decisions on where to put stuff with respect to size or other criteria, that doesn't really make sense. We have subprojects, they go in trunk. That's all. Yepp, it should go to trunk and as Karl suggested only current trunk of Karaf should be moved here. Also, I think your package name would have to be org.apache.felix.karaf. I think this would be the rule, likewise it is not Apache Karaf, it is Apache Felix Karaf. Otherwise, the implication is that it is a top-level Apache project. Of course, I don't care and if the Apache rules allow it, then I guess we can debate it. Hmm, I'm not sure if there are any rules. Afaik we can use any package names we want (of course if it makes sense). There are other projects at Apache which use different package names than their top level project name (xbean from Geronimo being the most prominent). And they also call it Apache XBean (http://geronimo.apache.org/xbean/index.html). So I think as long as we don't clash with anything existing, we're fine. The question is: what is the better option of the two? If we're pretty sure that this will become TLP later on, using just Karaf (Apache Karaf, org.apache.karaf) seems right - if we're unsure adding Felix to the name, package makes more sense. For now I would go with Apache Felix Karaf and org.apache.felix.karaf even if this would mean to rename things once Karaf gets TLP (although even then renaming of the packages would not be required). Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler cziege...@apache.org -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
On 4/24/09 12:00 PM, peter royal wrote: On Apr 24, 2009, at 10:05 AM, Richard S. Hall wrote: Anyway, my concern here is not over what we want to do, but what we should do from an Apache process perspective. I don't want Felix (the project) creating some firestorm by being seen as implicitly promoting subprojects to TLP. Using Lucene/Hadoop as examples, their sub-projects don't necessarily include 'lucene' or 'hadoop' in their package names. So I think its entirely reasonable to have org.apache.karaf You may be right. Not that I like a lot of rules, but this is one that seems odd that there is not a rule for it. There is no guidance for avoid naming clashes among projects. Certainly odd. - richard
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
I guess that's the reason why the use of functional / technology related names are discouraged for apache projects. This avoid a lot of the possible clashes. We don't have so many projects at Apache we can't find new names yet ... On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 23:22, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote: On 4/24/09 12:00 PM, peter royal wrote: On Apr 24, 2009, at 10:05 AM, Richard S. Hall wrote: Anyway, my concern here is not over what we want to do, but what we should do from an Apache process perspective. I don't want Felix (the project) creating some firestorm by being seen as implicitly promoting subprojects to TLP. Using Lucene/Hadoop as examples, their sub-projects don't necessarily include 'lucene' or 'hadoop' in their package names. So I think its entirely reasonable to have org.apache.karaf You may be right. Not that I like a lot of rules, but this is one that seems odd that there is not a rule for it. There is no guidance for avoid naming clashes among projects. Certainly odd. - richard -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
Hello Guillaume, On Apr 24, 2009, at 18:34 , Guillaume Nodet wrote: If we rename packages, everything will be broken for sure. I'd be pleased not to do that too often ;-) I don't see karaf packages staying org.apache.servicemix.kernel either ... That's true, so it's probably best to call the package org.apache.karaf so it does not need to be renamed if it moves from Felix to a TLP later. I do agree with Richard here that it's odd that Apache has no naming policy that avoids name clashes. Does your consistency includes jira and confluence ? Meaning we'd move existing issues (at least those still open) and the current web site into the FELIX jira and confluence spaces ? Looking at your current website, it would be hard to make it fit in the current Felix website. To be honest, I think we still need to do some work on the Felix website to make our current subprojects more visible and make the whole site easier to use for people that want to start out with Felix/OSGi. About JIRA, I don't think trying to migrate the current issues makes a lot of sense. There really aren't any good tools for that as far as I know. I could live with Karaf sticking with the current JIRA or perhaps slowly migrating towards the Felix JIRA (but only for new issues, leave existing ones where they are now). TBH this is a case we have not had before at Felix, accomodating such a large subproject with an existing history at Apache, so I guess there are quite a few things we need to figure out (which already became appearant from this thread). Greetings, Marcel
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
Hi, Marcel Offermans schrieb: About JIRA, I don't think trying to migrate the current issues makes a lot of sense. There really aren't any good tools for that as far as I know. I could live with Karaf sticking with the current JIRA or perhaps slowly migrating towards the Felix JIRA (but only for new issues, leave existing ones where they are now). Hmm, I think migration of the issues from one project to another is a trivial thing in JIRA. We would have to watch out for assigned components/versions, but basically it is not that complicated. BTW: We did this for the WebConsole and Maven SCR plugin issues when we moved them from the Sling project to Felix. And: it is only for the open issues. We probably don't want to move the closed ones, just like we probably don't move the past releases, tags and branches Just my $.02 Regards Felix
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 00:14, Marcel Offermans marcel.offerm...@luminis.nl wrote: On Apr 24, 2009, at 23:45 , Felix Meschberger wrote: Marcel Offermans schrieb: About JIRA, I don't think trying to migrate the current issues makes a lot of sense. There really aren't any good tools for that as far as I know. I could live with Karaf sticking with the current JIRA or perhaps slowly migrating towards the Felix JIRA (but only for new issues, leave existing ones where they are now). Hmm, I think migration of the issues from one project to another is a trivial thing in JIRA. We would have to watch out for assigned components/versions, but basically it is not that complicated. That's good to know. Does that include people who have created an account in JIRA and are watching specific issues? Unfortunately, this only work inside the same JIRA instance. The current jira issues are hosted at: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/SMX4KNL whereas felix is at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX So I don't think we'll be able to move the issues at all. It's only possible to move them to another project hosted on the same instance :-( And: it is only for the open issues. We probably don't want to move the closed ones, just like we probably don't move the past releases, tags and branches Agreed. We don't have too many opened issues right now (36 actually) so it may be doable to recreate them, but we'll loose creator / watchers / comments if any. Greetings, Marcel -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
Re: [Karaf] Moving Karaf svn into Felix
On Apr 24, 2009, at 23:45 , Felix Meschberger wrote: Marcel Offermans schrieb: About JIRA, I don't think trying to migrate the current issues makes a lot of sense. There really aren't any good tools for that as far as I know. I could live with Karaf sticking with the current JIRA or perhaps slowly migrating towards the Felix JIRA (but only for new issues, leave existing ones where they are now). Hmm, I think migration of the issues from one project to another is a trivial thing in JIRA. We would have to watch out for assigned components/versions, but basically it is not that complicated. That's good to know. Does that include people who have created an account in JIRA and are watching specific issues? And: it is only for the open issues. We probably don't want to move the closed ones, just like we probably don't move the past releases, tags and branches Agreed. Greetings, Marcel
