from:"Krzysztof Sobkowiak"


Hi

Due to the training for my company I couldn't follow the whole 
discussion about future of ServiceMix5. Are we going to upgrade it to 
Karaf 3.x or will it be released on basis of Karaf 2.x?


Regards
Krzysztof

On 13.02.2014 09:53, Gert Vanthienen wrote:

L.S.,


Moving the discussion from the users@ to dev@ mailing list, it would
be good to figure out how to go about things.

For now, I would propose we avoid adding any extra complexity and just
focus on getting a simple assembly project in place that combines the
latest and greatest bits of ActiveMQ, CXF, Camel, Karaf, ...

How about we start with the ServiceMix 5 codebase, remove the new
Camel interceptor bits for now and just focus on getting the assembly
itself, the examples and the integration tests working?  That way, we
should have a fairly manageable amount of work to perform before we
can get to a new release.

We have a board report coming up in March, so we can convey this new
direction in that. Perhaps we should use the next board report after
that as a checkpoint to see if we are making any progress: by then, I
think we should have been able to do at least one or two releases and
we should have found a few people that are willing/able to help out
with the work. If we have not made any progress on the community
aspect by then, it may be a good time to reflect on how to gracefully
move people over to a plain Karaf/CXF/Camel/... solution instead.


Wdyt?

Gert Vanthienen



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Plan for ServiceMix 5

I prefer the solution with restart of the ServiceMix code base and build 
it from scratch based on Karaf 3.x (we could use the new plugins and the 
new configuration files from Karaf).  But I saw the current version of 
ServiceMix 5 has been updated to the newest version of Karaf 2.3.x and 
the problems I had when I was trying to perform the upgrade to 2.3.3 was 
only caused by the sclala library.


I haven't fully tested ServiceMix 5, but the samples I have tested make 
no problems. When ServiceMix 5 is almost stable perhaps we could  fix 
the existing issues and release it in this form (based on Karaf 2.3.x, 
probably upgraded later to Karaf 2.4.x) and start ServiceMix 6 from 
scratch based on Karaf 3.x and Karaf features. I think people have made 
some good work to make ServiceMix5 and perhaps we shouldn't send it into 
/dev/null :) What do you think about this?


Regards
Krzysztof


On 14.02.2014 10:33, Gert Vanthienen wrote:

Hi Krzystof,


Up to now, the codebase is using Karaf 2.3.x, but there's nothing
preventing us from upgrading.  If we're going for a new start, we
might as well start with the latest and greatest, I think.  Would you
fancy taking a stab at that upgrade?


Regards,

Gert Vanthienen


On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
 wrote:

Hi

Due to the training for my company I couldn't follow the whole discussion
about future of ServiceMix5. Are we going to upgrade it to Karaf 3.x or will
it be released on basis of Karaf 2.x?

Regards
Krzysztof


On 13.02.2014 09:53, Gert Vanthienen wrote:

L.S.,


Moving the discussion from the users@ to dev@ mailing list, it would
be good to figure out how to go about things.

For now, I would propose we avoid adding any extra complexity and just
focus on getting a simple assembly project in place that combines the
latest and greatest bits of ActiveMQ, CXF, Camel, Karaf, ...

How about we start with the ServiceMix 5 codebase, remove the new
Camel interceptor bits for now and just focus on getting the assembly
itself, the examples and the integration tests working?  That way, we
should have a fairly manageable amount of work to perform before we
can get to a new release.

We have a board report coming up in March, so we can convey this new
direction in that. Perhaps we should use the next board report after
that as a checkpoint to see if we are making any progress: by then, I
think we should have been able to do at least one or two releases and
we should have found a few people that are willing/able to help out
with the work. If we have not made any progress on the community
aspect by then, it may be a good time to reflect on how to gracefully
move people over to a plain Karaf/CXF/Camel/... solution instead.


Wdyt?

Gert Vanthienen



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Plan for ServiceMix 5


I meant following:

 * If we want to start ServiceMix 5 again from the beginning (by
   removing the current code base and creating a new custom Karaf 3.x
   distribution) we could do following instead:
 o we could release ServiceMix 5 in the current form (with Karaf
   2.3 or 2.4) if we think ServiceMix is stable and we don't want
   to remove the current work
 o start ServiceMix 6 from the beginning using Karaf 3.x

   But if there is no reason  to release ServiceMix 5 in the current
   form we can restart ServiceMix 5 with Karaf 3.x

 * if we want only to upgrade ServiceMix 5 (without restarting the
   sources) then ServiceMix 5 should be upgraded to Karaf 3.x.


On 14.02.2014 11:55, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

I've not understood clearly, you would base SMX5 on Karaf 2.3.3 and SMX6 on
Karaf 3.0.0 ?

I prefer to align major version upgrades to those of Karaf, so SMX 4.x on
Karaf 2.x and SMX 5 on Karaf 3,but any of the two is good for me.


2014-02-14 11:06 GMT+01:00 Krzysztof Sobkowiak :


I prefer the solution with restart of the ServiceMix code base and build
it from scratch based on Karaf 3.x (we could use the new plugins and the
new configuration files from Karaf).  But I saw the current version of
ServiceMix 5 has been updated to the newest version of Karaf 2.3.x and the
problems I had when I was trying to perform the upgrade to 2.3.3 was only
caused by the sclala library.

I haven't fully tested ServiceMix 5, but the samples I have tested make no
problems. When ServiceMix 5 is almost stable perhaps we could  fix the
existing issues and release it in this form (based on Karaf 2.3.x, probably
upgraded later to Karaf 2.4.x) and start ServiceMix 6 from scratch based on
Karaf 3.x and Karaf features. I think people have made some good work to
make ServiceMix5 and perhaps we shouldn't send it into /dev/null :) What do
you think about this?

Regards
Krzysztof






--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Plan for ServiceMix 5

But you proposition makes also sense. In this case we had only 2 
distributions of ServiceMix upgraded to the newest Karaf 2.x and 3.x lines


On 14.02.2014 13:03, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:

I meant following:

  * If we want to start ServiceMix 5 again from the beginning (by
removing the current code base and creating a new custom Karaf 3.x
distribution) we could do following instead:
  o we could release ServiceMix 5 in the current form (with Karaf
2.3 or 2.4) if we think ServiceMix is stable and we don't want
to remove the current work
  o start ServiceMix 6 from the beginning using Karaf 3.x

But if there is no reason  to release ServiceMix 5 in the current
form we can restart ServiceMix 5 with Karaf 3.x

  * if we want only to upgrade ServiceMix 5 (without restarting the
sources) then ServiceMix 5 should be upgraded to Karaf 3.x.


On 14.02.2014 11:55, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

I've not understood clearly, you would base SMX5 on Karaf 2.3.3 and SMX6 on
Karaf 3.0.0 ?

I prefer to align major version upgrades to those of Karaf, so SMX 4.x on
Karaf 2.x and SMX 5 on Karaf 3,but any of the two is good for me.


2014-02-14 11:06 GMT+01:00 Krzysztof Sobkowiak:


I prefer the solution with restart of the ServiceMix code base and build
it from scratch based on Karaf 3.x (we could use the new plugins and the
new configuration files from Karaf).  But I saw the current version of
ServiceMix 5 has been updated to the newest version of Karaf 2.3.x and the
problems I had when I was trying to perform the upgrade to 2.3.3 was only
caused by the sclala library.

I haven't fully tested ServiceMix 5, but the samples I have tested make no
problems. When ServiceMix 5 is almost stable perhaps we could  fix the
existing issues and release it in this form (based on Karaf 2.3.x, probably
upgraded later to Karaf 2.4.x) and start ServiceMix 6 from scratch based on
Karaf 3.x and Karaf features. I think people have made some good work to
make ServiceMix5 and perhaps we shouldn't send it into /dev/null :) What do
you think about this?

Regards
Krzysztof






--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Plan for ServiceMix 5


+1 too
ServiceMix can be released quickly and we have time to start with 
ServiceMix 6


On 14.02.2014 14:10, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:

Good morning gentlemen,

Depending of the timeline, I would propose (and prefer ;)):
- ServiceMix 5 using Karaf 2.3.4 (in vote today)
- ServiceMix 6 using Karaf 3.0.1 or 3.0.2 (that will be stable)

Especially, using Karaf 3.0.1, we have some overlap that I would like 
to cleanup. For instance, it would be possible to remove ServiceMix 
Naming and replace with Karaf JNDI instead (which provide a JNDI 
Context now).


So, to avoid to postpone SMX 5 too far, I would release with Karaf 
stable branch (2.3.x), and prepare SMX6 with Karaf 3.0.x.


Moreover, we don't have a lot of feedback/update from the other 
projects (Camel, CXF, ActiveMQ, ...) with Karaf 3.0.x.


Regards
JB



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Problems with ServiceMix 5 after upgrade to Spring 3.2.x RELEASE


Hi

I have tried to build the current version of ServiceMix 5. The 
compilation of ServiceMix fails with error about missing dependency 
spring-asm in version 3.2.4.RELEASE. It is caused by spring-asm in 
dependencyManagement in the main pom. spring-asm has been removed with 
Spring 3.2.x 
(http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/3.2.x/spring-framework-reference/html/migration-3.2.html 
D.3).


After this problem is fixed there is another problem with installing 
examples in itests. The example features still refer the original spring 
jars which are no more osgified with Spring 3.2.x. The jars from EBR 
should be used.


I have attached a patch to the original JIRA issue 
(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2178) which is already in 
status Resolved. I don't know if I have done it a right way. Should I 
ope a new Issue?


Regards
Krzysztof


--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Plan for ServiceMix 5


Hi

I try to summarize. If I'm wrong pleas correct me.

The plan (at least one of the possible scenarios) for the Karaf 3.x line 
of SMX was to completely remove the code base of SMX and start again 
with a new custom  Karaf 3.x distribution which only assembles the 
Camel, ActiveMQ, CXF features and features provided by Karaf Enterprise 
Features subproject. Actual SMX 5 features like Activiti integration 
could be moved into the Karaf Enterprise features too. It would give us 
following advantages


 * the features in Karaf Enterprise Features subproject could have a
   separate lifecycle, could be easy installable on vanilla Karaf and
   could by assembled by the SMX distribution
 * SMX could be easily upgradeable  to the newer Karaf version, because
   we can create a new custom Karaf distribution and add the necessary
   features.

There is yet another problem described some mails ago. We are not 100% 
sure Camel, ActiveMX and CXF work on Karaf 3.x with no problems. Some 
people have reported problems with usage of Camel or ActiveMQ on Karaf 
3.x. Karaf 3.x has also still some problems which must be solved (or 
will be solved by 3.0.1)


Because SMX 5 is almost stable, it would be wrong idea to remove its 
code base and start SMX5 from the scratch. It would delay the SMX5 
release. We can fix the SMX5 issues and release it based on Karaf 2.3.x. 
We have time to start a new code base for SMX 6 and build it from the 
beginning. We have time to solve the eventual problems with usage of the 
esb components on Karaf 3.x.


We doesn't need to wait some next years to release SMX6 after SMX5 will 
be released. When SMX6 is ready it could be released some months after 
release of SMX5


Regards
Krzysztof


On 15.02.2014 02:16, Raúl Kripalani wrote:

Oops, didn't read JB's message before posting my previous one.

Why does SMX have to do a major release to upgrade from Karaf 2.2.x to Karaf
2.3.x, when within the Karaf project this is simply a minor version upgrade?
I would expect it to be a minor version on our side too.

Sure, I don't want to delay SMX5, but I don't want it to be a disappointing
release either. We've gone 5 years without a major release (SMX 4.0 was
released in 2009), and SMX5's gotta be big to avoid losing the confidence of
users in (1) the roadmap of the project and the (2) technical consistency of
the SMX community.

My 2 cent.

Regards
Raúl Kripalani.



--
View this message in context: 
http://servicemix.396122.n5.nabble.com/Plan-for-ServiceMix-5-tp5719013p5719067.html
Sent from the ServiceMix - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Plan for ServiceMix 5

I'm not sure if we should change the version to 4.9.0-SNAPSHOT but it 
would be an option for the solution proposed by Jean-Baptiste: 4.9.x 
with Karaf 2.3.x and 5.x with Karaf 3.x instead of 5.x with Karaf 2.3.x 
and 6.x with Karaf 3.x. The both ideas have advantages and 
disadvantages. I think here starts again a discussion about semantic 
versioning.


I don't think we should create a new repository for ServiceMix. I 
propose to rename the current servicemix5 repository in servicemix or 
servicemix-assembly and make a branch for ServiceMix 5 (or 4.9 as 
proposed by Cristiano). The development of ServiceMix 6 (or 5 as 
proposed by Cristiano) could start in master branch - 1 repository,  1 
branch for the major release (like in Karaf)


We could eventually fully migrate to git development (without svn like 
Karaf) with this repository.


Regards
Krzysztof




On 15.02.2014 12:02, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

I try to summarize. If I'm wrong pleas correct me.


Good summary and I agree with you.

It's true that a ServiceMix based on Karaf 3.0.0 may need some more
testing, so it would be good to release a new ServiceMix based on Karaf
2.3.3 asap, but already without NMR and JBI.



The plan (at least one of the possible scenarios) for the Karaf 3.x line
of SMX was to completely remove the code base of SMX and start again with a
new custom  Karaf 3.x distribution which only assembles the Camel,
ActiveMQ, CXF features

I think we should do that: let's create a new repository (move to GIT?) and
start assembling the new ServiceMix based on Karaf 3.0.


Because SMX 5 is almost stable, it would be wrong idea to remove its code

base and start SMX5 from the scratch.


My proposal is to change the version to 4.9.0-SNAPSHOT (so it address also
concerns like those of Raul about the minor/major versions upgrade) then
remove the other dependencies from it leaving it to be only a Karaf 2.3.3
plus Camel, CXF and AcvtiveMQ, and release it as soon as possible.

the jump in version from 4.5.x to 4.9.x should alert user that it is a
transitory release that lead to ServiceMix 5.0 that it is Karaf 3.0.0 based.

My 2 cents :-)

Cristiano




--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Plan for ServiceMix 5


For me it is ok, we miss nothing. But I have no right yet to decide ;-)

On 15.02.2014 13:44, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

Anyhow, for me in the end it is the same,
What is it missing now to start?

Should we make a vote about migration to git?

Il sabato 15 febbraio 2014, Krzysztof Sobkowiak 
ha scritto:


I'm not sure if we should change the version to 4.9.0-SNAPSHOT but it
would be an option for the solution proposed by Jean-Baptiste: 4.9.x with
Karaf 2.3.x and 5.x with Karaf 3.x instead of 5.x with Karaf 2.3.x and 6.x
with Karaf 3.x. The both ideas have advantages and disadvantages. I think
here starts again a discussion about semantic versioning.

I don't think we should create a new repository for ServiceMix. I propose
to rename the current servicemix5 repository in servicemix or
servicemix-assembly and make a branch for ServiceMix 5 (or 4.9 as proposed
by Cristiano). The development of ServiceMix 6 (or 5 as proposed by
Cristiano) could start in master branch - 1 repository,  1 branch for the
major release (like in Karaf)

We could eventually fully migrate to git development (without svn like
Karaf) with this repository.

Regards
Krzysztof




On 15.02.2014 12:02, Cristiano Costantini wrote:


I try to summarize. If I'm wrong pleas correct me.

  Good summary and I agree with you.

It's true that a ServiceMix based on Karaf 3.0.0 may need some more
testing, so it would be good to release a new ServiceMix based on Karaf
2.3.3 asap, but already without NMR and JBI.


  The plan (at least one of the possible scenarios) for the Karaf 3.x line

of SMX was to completely remove the code base of SMX and start again
with a
new custom  Karaf 3.x distribution which only assembles the Camel,
ActiveMQ, CXF features


I think we should do that: let's create a new repository (move to GIT?)
and
start assembling the new ServiceMix based on Karaf 3.0.


Because SMX 5 is almost stable, it would be wrong idea to remove its code


base and start SMX5 from the scratch.

  My proposal is to change the version to 4.9.0-SNAPSHOT (so it address

also
concerns like those of Raul about the minor/major versions upgrade) then
remove the other dependencies from it leaving it to be only a Karaf 2.3.3
plus Camel, CXF and AcvtiveMQ, and release it as soon as possible.

the jump in version from 4.5.x to 4.9.x should alert user that it is a
transitory release that lead to ServiceMix 5.0 that it is Karaf 3.0.0
based.

My 2 cents :-)

Cristiano



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center <
http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak




--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Plan for ServiceMix 5

We don't need to wait until the migration is finished. It can be done 
parallel together with renaming of the repository. The vote for the both 
tasks can be started. We only need to create a new branch for SXM5, 
(e.g. servicemix-5.x) in the current repository and start the SMX 6 code 
base in trunk from the beginning).


On 15.02.2014 14:08, Raul Kripalani wrote:

It's great to see all this activity again on the SMX mailing list - woohoo!

In my opinion, Git migration should not hold us back, nor block this great
momentum!

All we need immediately is a way to collaborate and send in traceable pull
requests to the community - there's already a GitHub mirror [1], trunk
branch.

Yes, committers won't be able to apply pull requests directly, but they can
take the patch and apply it on SVN in the meantime. Less than ideal, but
better than waiting.

Personally, I've reserved the day tomorrow to hack into SMX5; if you feel
like joining and discussing, I'll be in the IRC channel.

Regards,

[1] https://github.com/apache/servicemix5

*Raúl Kripalani*
Apache Camel PMC Member & Committer | Enterprise Architect, Open Source
Integration specialist
http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk

On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak <
krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> wrote:


For me it is ok, we miss nothing. But I have no right yet to decide ;-)


On 15.02.2014 13:44, Cristiano Costantini wrote:


Anyhow, for me in the end it is the same,
What is it missing now to start?

Should we make a vote about migration to git?

Il sabato 15 febbraio 2014, Krzysztof Sobkowiak <
krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com>
ha scritto:

  I'm not sure if we should change the version to 4.9.0-SNAPSHOT but it

would be an option for the solution proposed by Jean-Baptiste: 4.9.x with
Karaf 2.3.x and 5.x with Karaf 3.x instead of 5.x with Karaf 2.3.x and
6.x
with Karaf 3.x. The both ideas have advantages and disadvantages. I think
here starts again a discussion about semantic versioning.

I don't think we should create a new repository for ServiceMix. I propose
to rename the current servicemix5 repository in servicemix or
servicemix-assembly and make a branch for ServiceMix 5 (or 4.9 as
proposed
by Cristiano). The development of ServiceMix 6 (or 5 as proposed by
Cristiano) could start in master branch - 1 repository,  1 branch for the
major release (like in Karaf)

We could eventually fully migrate to git development (without svn like
Karaf) with this repository.

Regards
Krzysztof




On 15.02.2014 12:02, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

  I try to summarize. If I'm wrong pleas correct me.

   Good summary and I agree with you.


It's true that a ServiceMix based on Karaf 3.0.0 may need some more
testing, so it would be good to release a new ServiceMix based on Karaf
2.3.3 asap, but already without NMR and JBI.


   The plan (at least one of the possible scenarios) for the Karaf 3.x
line


of SMX was to completely remove the code base of SMX and start again
with a
new custom  Karaf 3.x distribution which only assembles the Camel,
ActiveMQ, CXF features

  I think we should do that: let's create a new repository (move to

GIT?)
and
start assembling the new ServiceMix based on Karaf 3.0.


Because SMX 5 is almost stable, it would be wrong idea to remove its
code

  base and start SMX5 from the scratch.

   My proposal is to change the version to 4.9.0-SNAPSHOT (so it address


also
concerns like those of Raul about the minor/major versions upgrade) then
remove the other dependencies from it leaving it to be only a Karaf
2.3.3
plus Camel, CXF and AcvtiveMQ, and release it as soon as possible.

the jump in version from 4.5.x to 4.9.x should alert user that it is a
transitory release that lead to ServiceMix 5.0 that it is Karaf 3.0.0
based.

My 2 cents :-)

Cristiano


  --

Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center <
http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center <
http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak




--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Error with activiti-camel while building servicemix 5 trunk


Hi Cristiano

I had no problem with the build. Probably my local maven repo contains 
the missing libraries and I don't have this problem. There is already a 
JIRA issue (SM-2229 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2229>)  to 
upgrade Activiti to 5.14.


Regards
Krzysztof

On 15.02.2014 22:11, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

Hi,

I'm trying to build by myself ServiceMix 5 from the trunk (I've cloned the
git repo and I'm working on the trunk branch)

but building fails as maven does not resolve version 5.10 of activiti-camel
(Failed to execute goal on project org.apache.servicemix.activiti.config:
Could not resolve dependencies for project
org.apache.servicemix.activiti:org.apache.servicemix.activiti.config:bundle:5.0.0-SNAPSHOT:
The following artifacts could not be resolved:
org.activiti:activiti-camel:jar:5.10,
org.activiti:activiti-engine:jar:5.10, org.activiti:activiti-osgi:jar:5.10:
Could not find artifact org.activiti:activiti-camel:jar:5.10)


I see on maven central repo, only version 5.14 is available:

 org.activiti
 activiti-camel
 5.14



1. do you have the same problem of mine?
2. do you think it should be upgraded to 5.14 (or is locked to version 5.10
due conflicts/compatibility requirements with other dependencies ?

thank you,
Cristiano




--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Problems with ServiceMix 5 after upgrade to Spring 3.2.x RELEASE


Hi Jon

I have opened a new JIRA for this issue - SM-2237 
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2237>


Regards
Krzysztof



On 14.02.2014 22:15, Jon Anstey wrote:

Thanks for the patch Krzysztof. I'll try and take a look at it tomorrow.

Cheers,
Jon
On Feb 14, 2014 5:39 PM, "Krzysztof Sobkowiak" 
wrote:


Hi

I have tried to build the current version of ServiceMix 5. The compilation
of ServiceMix fails with error about missing dependency spring-asm in
version 3.2.4.RELEASE. It is caused by spring-asm in dependencyManagement
in the main pom. spring-asm has been removed with Spring 3.2.x (
http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/3.2.x/spring-framework-
reference/html/migration-3.2.html D.3).

After this problem is fixed there is another problem with installing
examples in itests. The example features still refer the original spring
jars which are no more osgified with Spring 3.2.x. The jars from EBR should
be used.

I have attached a patch to the original JIRA issue (
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2178) which is already in status
Resolved. I don't know if I have done it a right way. Should I ope a new
Issue?

Regards
Krzysztof


--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center <
http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak




--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Error with activiti-camel while building servicemix 5 trunk

I think, Activiti should be included in ServiceMix and should be 
upgraded to 5.14, but there are some problems with the upgrade. Please 
look at the issue SM-2229


Regards
Krzysztof

On 15.02.2014 22:29, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

Thank you Krzysztof,
I think that it should build in a clean environment without the need of
artifact in exotic repos,
so for me we should either upgrade activiti to version 5.14 or remove
activiti from ServiceMix 5 main trunk (I don't know how many people use
activiti, I don't).

What do you think?

Cristiano

2014-02-15 22:16 GMT+01:00 Krzysztof Sobkowiak :


Hi Cristiano

I had no problem with the build. Probably my local maven repo contains the
missing libraries and I don't have this problem. There is already a JIRA
issue (SM-2229 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2229>)  to
upgrade Activiti to 5.14.

Regards
Krzysztof


On 15.02.2014 22:11, Cristiano Costantini wrote:


Hi,

I'm trying to build by myself ServiceMix 5 from the trunk (I've cloned the
git repo and I'm working on the trunk branch)

but building fails as maven does not resolve version 5.10 of
activiti-camel
(Failed to execute goal on project org.apache.servicemix.activiti.config:
Could not resolve dependencies for project
org.apache.servicemix.activiti:org.apache.servicemix.activiti.config:
bundle:5.0.0-SNAPSHOT:
The following artifacts could not be resolved:
org.activiti:activiti-camel:jar:5.10,
org.activiti:activiti-engine:jar:5.10, org.activiti:activiti-osgi:
jar:5.10:
Could not find artifact org.activiti:activiti-camel:jar:5.10)


I see on maven central repo, only version 5.14 is available:

  org.activiti
  activiti-camel
  5.14



1. do you have the same problem of mine?
2. do you think it should be upgraded to 5.14 (or is locked to version
5.10
due conflicts/compatibility requirements with other dependencies ?

thank you,
Cristiano



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center <
http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak




--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Error with activiti-camel while building servicemix 5 trunk


Yes. After upgrade to 5.14 it can be removed.

On 15.02.2014 22:36, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

I see it found them in Alfresco Repository


 
 alfresco.public
 Alfresco Public Repository
 https://maven.alfresco.com/nexus/content/groups/public

 
 true
 
 
 false
 
 

I don't like this approach external repos... they are hard to maintain...




2014-02-15 22:29 GMT+01:00 Cristiano Costantini <
cristiano.costant...@gmail.com>:


Thank you Krzysztof,
I think that it should build in a clean environment without the need of
artifact in exotic repos,
so for me we should either upgrade activiti to version 5.14 or remove
activiti from ServiceMix 5 main trunk (I don't know how many people use
activiti, I don't).

What do you think?

Cristiano

2014-02-15 22:16 GMT+01:00 Krzysztof Sobkowiak 
:

Hi Cristiano

I had no problem with the build. Probably my local maven repo contains
the missing libraries and I don't have this problem. There is already a
JIRA issue (SM-2229 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2229>)  to
upgrade Activiti to 5.14.

Regards
Krzysztof


On 15.02.2014 22:11, Cristiano Costantini wrote:


Hi,

I'm trying to build by myself ServiceMix 5 from the trunk (I've cloned
the
git repo and I'm working on the trunk branch)

but building fails as maven does not resolve version 5.10 of
activiti-camel
(Failed to execute goal on project org.apache.servicemix.
activiti.config:
Could not resolve dependencies for project
org.apache.servicemix.activiti:org.apache.servicemix.activiti.config:
bundle:5.0.0-SNAPSHOT:
The following artifacts could not be resolved:
org.activiti:activiti-camel:jar:5.10,
org.activiti:activiti-engine:jar:5.10, org.activiti:activiti-osgi:
jar:5.10:
Could not find artifact org.activiti:activiti-camel:jar:5.10)


I see on maven central repo, only version 5.14 is available:

  org.activiti
  activiti-camel
  5.14



1. do you have the same problem of mine?
2. do you think it should be upgraded to 5.14 (or is locked to version
5.10
due conflicts/compatibility requirements with other dependencies ?

thank you,
Cristiano



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center <
http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak






--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Error with activiti-camel while building servicemix 5 trunk

I think, this feature should be moved in Karaf Enterprise Features, 
after the Karaf subproject will be created.


On 15.02.2014 22:38, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:

Yes. After upgrade to 5.14 it can be removed.

On 15.02.2014 22:36, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

I see it found them in Alfresco Repository


 
 alfresco.public
 Alfresco Public Repository
 https://maven.alfresco.com/nexus/content/groups/public

 
 true
 
 
 false
 
 

I don't like this approach external repos... they are hard to maintain...




2014-02-15 22:29 GMT+01:00 Cristiano Costantini <
cristiano.costant...@gmail.com>:


Thank you Krzysztof,
I think that it should build in a clean environment without the need of
artifact in exotic repos,
so for me we should either upgrade activiti to version 5.14 or remove
activiti from ServiceMix 5 main trunk (I don't know how many people use
activiti, I don't).

What do you think?

Cristiano

2014-02-15 22:16 GMT+01:00 Krzysztof Sobkowiak
:

Hi Cristiano

I had no problem with the build. Probably my local maven repo contains
the missing libraries and I don't have this problem. There is already a
JIRA issue (SM-2229<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2229>)  to
upgrade Activiti to 5.14.

Regards
Krzysztof


On 15.02.2014 22:11, Cristiano Costantini wrote:


Hi,

I'm trying to build by myself ServiceMix 5 from the trunk (I've cloned
the
git repo and I'm working on the trunk branch)

but building fails as maven does not resolve version 5.10 of
activiti-camel
(Failed to execute goal on project org.apache.servicemix.
activiti.config:
Could not resolve dependencies for project
org.apache.servicemix.activiti:org.apache.servicemix.activiti.config:
bundle:5.0.0-SNAPSHOT:
The following artifacts could not be resolved:
org.activiti:activiti-camel:jar:5.10,
org.activiti:activiti-engine:jar:5.10, org.activiti:activiti-osgi:
jar:5.10:
Could not find artifact org.activiti:activiti-camel:jar:5.10)


I see on maven central repo, only version 5.14 is available:

  org.activiti
  activiti-camel
  5.14



1. do you have the same problem of mine?
2. do you think it should be upgraded to 5.14 (or is locked to version
5.10
due conflicts/compatibility requirements with other dependencies ?

thank you,
Cristiano



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini<http://www.pl.capgemini.com/>  | Software Solutions Center<
http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/>  | Wroclaw
e-mail:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com  <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com>  |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak




--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Error with activiti-camel while building servicemix 5 trunk

I had today problems with compilation of examples caused by the upgrade 
to Spring 3.2.4.RELEASE. I have created an issue and attached a patch 
solving this problem. Had you any problems with the compilation due the 
missing spring-asm library?


On 15.02.2014 22:56, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

yeah,
ServiceMix should be made of Karaf, CXF, Camel and ActiveMQ in my opinion.

However I've changed the version of activiti to 5.14 and it compiles fine,
now I have a problem with compilation of examples...
[INFO] Apache ServiceMix :: Examples :: Akka :: Akka Camel  FAILURE
[16.475s]
[INFO] Apache ServiceMix :: Examples :: Camel Drools . FAILURE [4.400s]
[INFO] Apache ServiceMix :: Examples :: Camel Drools Blueprint  FAILURE
[0.021s]

consequently also assemblies fails (I expect because examples are included
in the distribution).

I'll check tomorrow.
Regards,
Cristiano



2014-02-15 22:47 GMT+01:00 Krzysztof Sobkowiak :


I think, this feature should be moved in Karaf Enterprise Features, after
the Karaf subproject will be created.


On 15.02.2014 22:38, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:


Yes. After upgrade to 5.14 it can be removed.

On 15.02.2014 22:36, Cristiano Costantini wrote:


I see it found them in Alfresco Repository


  
  alfresco.public
  Alfresco Public Repository
  https://maven.alfresco.com/nexus/content/groups/public

  
  true
  
  
  false
  
  

I don't like this approach external repos... they are hard to maintain...




2014-02-15 22:29 GMT+01:00 Cristiano Costantini <
cristiano.costant...@gmail.com>:

  Thank you Krzysztof,

I think that it should build in a clean environment without the need of
artifact in exotic repos,
so for me we should either upgrade activiti to version 5.14 or remove
activiti from ServiceMix 5 main trunk (I don't know how many people use
activiti, I don't).

What do you think?

Cristiano

2014-02-15 22:16 GMT+01:00 Krzysztof Sobkowiak
:

Hi Cristiano


I had no problem with the build. Probably my local maven repo contains
the missing libraries and I don't have this problem. There is already a
JIRA issue (SM-2229<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2229>)
  to
upgrade Activiti to 5.14.

Regards
Krzysztof


On 15.02.2014 22:11, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

  Hi,

I'm trying to build by myself ServiceMix 5 from the trunk (I've cloned
the
git repo and I'm working on the trunk branch)

but building fails as maven does not resolve version 5.10 of
activiti-camel
(Failed to execute goal on project org.apache.servicemix.
activiti.config:
Could not resolve dependencies for project
org.apache.servicemix.activiti:org.apache.servicemix.activiti.config:
bundle:5.0.0-SNAPSHOT:
The following artifacts could not be resolved:
org.activiti:activiti-camel:jar:5.10,
org.activiti:activiti-engine:jar:5.10, org.activiti:activiti-osgi:
jar:5.10:
Could not find artifact org.activiti:activiti-camel:jar:5.10)


I see on maven central repo, only version 5.14 is available:

   org.activiti
   activiti-camel
   5.14



1. do you have the same problem of mine?
2. do you think it should be upgraded to 5.14 (or is locked to version
5.10
due conflicts/compatibility requirements with other dependencies ?

thank you,
Cristiano


  --

Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini<http://www.pl.capgemini.com/>  | Software Solutions Center<
http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/>  | Wroclaw
e-mail:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com  <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com>
  |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center <
http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center <
http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak




--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Error with activiti-camel while building servicemix 5 trunk

I have just updated activiti to 5.14 and successfully built ServiceMix 
5. But my local copy of ServiceMix contains the patches I have created 
today. I'll checkout the fresh sources and try again with activiti 5.14


On 15.02.2014 23:07, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:
I had today problems with compilation of examples caused by the 
upgrade to Spring 3.2.4.RELEASE. I have created an issue and attached 
a patch solving this problem. Had you any problems with the 
compilation due the missing spring-asm library?


On 15.02.2014 22:56, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

yeah,
ServiceMix should be made of Karaf, CXF, Camel and ActiveMQ in my opinion.

However I've changed the version of activiti to 5.14 and it compiles fine,
now I have a problem with compilation of examples...
[INFO] Apache ServiceMix :: Examples :: Akka :: Akka Camel  FAILURE
[16.475s]
[INFO] Apache ServiceMix :: Examples :: Camel Drools . FAILURE [4.400s]
[INFO] Apache ServiceMix :: Examples :: Camel Drools Blueprint  FAILURE
[0.021s]

consequently also assemblies fails (I expect because examples are included
in the distribution).

I'll check tomorrow.
Regards,
Cristiano



2014-02-15 22:47 GMT+01:00 Krzysztof Sobkowiak:


I think, this feature should be moved in Karaf Enterprise Features, after
the Karaf subproject will be created.


On 15.02.2014 22:38, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:


Yes. After upgrade to 5.14 it can be removed.

On 15.02.2014 22:36, Cristiano Costantini wrote:


I see it found them in Alfresco Repository


  
  alfresco.public
  Alfresco Public Repository
  https://maven.alfresco.com/nexus/content/groups/public

  
  true
  
  
  false
  
  

I don't like this approach external repos... they are hard to maintain...




2014-02-15 22:29 GMT+01:00 Cristiano Costantini <
cristiano.costant...@gmail.com>:

  Thank you Krzysztof,

I think that it should build in a clean environment without the need of
artifact in exotic repos,
so for me we should either upgrade activiti to version 5.14 or remove
activiti from ServiceMix 5 main trunk (I don't know how many people use
activiti, I don't).

What do you think?

Cristiano

2014-02-15 22:16 GMT+01:00 Krzysztof Sobkowiak
:

Hi Cristiano


I had no problem with the build. Probably my local maven repo contains
the missing libraries and I don't have this problem. There is already a
JIRA issue (SM-2229<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2229>)
  to
upgrade Activiti to 5.14.

Regards
Krzysztof


On 15.02.2014 22:11, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

  Hi,

I'm trying to build by myself ServiceMix 5 from the trunk (I've cloned
the
git repo and I'm working on the trunk branch)

but building fails as maven does not resolve version 5.10 of
activiti-camel
(Failed to execute goal on project org.apache.servicemix.
activiti.config:
Could not resolve dependencies for project
org.apache.servicemix.activiti:org.apache.servicemix.activiti.config:
bundle:5.0.0-SNAPSHOT:
The following artifacts could not be resolved:
org.activiti:activiti-camel:jar:5.10,
org.activiti:activiti-engine:jar:5.10, org.activiti:activiti-osgi:
jar:5.10:
Could not find artifact org.activiti:activiti-camel:jar:5.10)


I see on maven central repo, only version 5.14 is available:

   org.activiti
   activiti-camel
   5.14



1. do you have the same problem of mine?
2. do you think it should be upgraded to 5.14 (or is locked to version
5.10
due conflicts/compatibility requirements with other dependencies ?

thank you,
Cristiano


  --




--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Error with activiti-camel while building servicemix 5 trunk


Hi Cristiano

I could build ServiceMix 5 with activiti 5.14. I only had to apply the 
patch for Spring. Otherwise the build fails. But again. My local 
repository contains probably some libraries which can be not obtained in 
when building with fresh repository


Regards
Krzysztof

On 15.02.2014 23:14, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:
I have just updated activiti to 5.14 and successfully built ServiceMix 
5. But my local copy of ServiceMix contains the patches I have created 
today. I'll checkout the fresh sources and try again with activiti 5.14


On 15.02.2014 23:07, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:
I had today problems with compilation of examples caused by the 
upgrade to Spring 3.2.4.RELEASE. I have created an issue and attached 
a patch solving this problem. Had you any problems with the 
compilation due the missing spring-asm library?


On 15.02.2014 22:56, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

yeah,
ServiceMix should be made of Karaf, CXF, Camel and ActiveMQ in my opinion.

However I've changed the version of activiti to 5.14 and it compiles fine,
now I have a problem with compilation of examples...
[INFO] Apache ServiceMix :: Examples :: Akka :: Akka Camel  FAILURE
[16.475s]
[INFO] Apache ServiceMix :: Examples :: Camel Drools . FAILURE [4.400s]
[INFO] Apache ServiceMix :: Examples :: Camel Drools Blueprint  FAILURE
[0.021s]

consequently also assemblies fails (I expect because examples are included
in the distribution).

I'll check tomorrow.
Regards,
Cristiano



2014-02-15 22:47 GMT+01:00 Krzysztof Sobkowiak:


I think, this feature should be moved in Karaf Enterprise Features, after
the Karaf subproject will be created.


On 15.02.2014 22:38, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:


Yes. After upgrade to 5.14 it can be removed.

On 15.02.2014 22:36, Cristiano Costantini wrote:


I see it found them in Alfresco Repository


  
  alfresco.public
  Alfresco Public Repository
  https://maven.alfresco.com/nexus/content/groups/public

  
  true
  
  
  false
  
  

I don't like this approach external repos... they are hard to maintain...




2014-02-15 22:29 GMT+01:00 Cristiano Costantini <
cristiano.costant...@gmail.com>:

  Thank you Krzysztof,

I think that it should build in a clean environment without the need of
artifact in exotic repos,
so for me we should either upgrade activiti to version 5.14 or remove
activiti from ServiceMix 5 main trunk (I don't know how many people use
activiti, I don't).

What do you think?

Cristiano

2014-02-15 22:16 GMT+01:00 Krzysztof Sobkowiak
:

Hi Cristiano


I had no problem with the build. Probably my local maven repo contains
the missing libraries and I don't have this problem. There is already a
JIRA issue (SM-2229<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2229>)
  to
upgrade Activiti to 5.14.

Regards
Krzysztof


On 15.02.2014 22:11, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

  Hi,

I'm trying to build by myself ServiceMix 5 from the trunk (I've cloned
the
git repo and I'm working on the trunk branch)

but building fails as maven does not resolve version 5.10 of
activiti-camel
(Failed to execute goal on project org.apache.servicemix.
activiti.config:
Could not resolve dependencies for project
org.apache.servicemix.activiti:org.apache.servicemix.activiti.config:
bundle:5.0.0-SNAPSHOT:
The following artifacts could not be resolved:
org.activiti:activiti-camel:jar:5.10,
org.activiti:activiti-engine:jar:5.10, org.activiti:activiti-osgi:
jar:5.10:
Could not find artifact org.activiti:activiti-camel:jar:5.10)


I see on maven central repo, only version 5.14 is available:

   org.activiti
   activiti-camel
   5.14



1. do you have the same problem of mine?
2. do you think it should be upgraded to 5.14 (or is locked to version
5.10
due conflicts/compatibility requirements with other dependencies ?

thank you,



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Upgrade to Karaf 3


Hi

As long as we are going to release the current code base as SMX 4.9,  
SMX 5 based on Karaf 3.x is ok for me.


Regards
Krzysztof

On 16.02.2014 14:19, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

Karaf 3 for ServiceMix 5,
Karaf 2.3.3 or 2.3.4 for ServiceMix 4.9


2014-02-16 8:10 GMT+01:00 Achim Nierbeck :


Hi,

As a version 5 suggests a big major change I'd go for karaf 3 also. And use
the current base for a 4.9 as already suggested.

Regards, Achim

sent from mobile device
Am 16.02.2014 08:03 schrieb "Filippo Balicchia" :


For Serviecemix 5 a prefer to use karaf 3.0.* too.
For me is +1

Regards

--Filippo





2014-02-15 23:17 GMT+01:00 Gert Vanthienen :


L.S.,


In the "Plan for ServiceMix 5" thread, we've seen a few proposals on
how to deal with the upgrade to Karaf 3.  I think this discussion
definitely merits a thread of its own.

Personally, I would prefer to do a ServiceMix 5 release with Karaf 3
if possible, but I'm not sure how stable/unstable this actually is at
the moment.  The 3.0.0 release definitely had a few issues, but a lot
of them have already been addressed and I think I even saw a 3.0.1 on
the roadmap for the next few weeks.

If this delay is all it takes to get that upgrade in ServiceMix 5, I
think we should do that.  However, we do not really know big the
problem is.  Perhaps someone could give it a go and try to figure out
how big of an issue this upgrade is?  The effort should definitely not
be in vain, we can always commit it to another branch and start
working on a later release there if necessary.  Any volunteers?

If we see it will just take a few more weeks to get everything in
order for a Karaf 3-based release, we can always do a release
candidate or two to show the world we're actually moving again and to
get some feedback from the community on where we're headed - that time
can actually come in quite handy to work on docs, for example.
However, if the research shows that things will take too long, we
probably have to come up with a 2.3.x-based release first anyway.


Wdyt?

Gert Vanthienen




--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Rename the servicemix5 repository


Hi all

Apart from the result of the vote about releasing ServiceMix based on 
Karf 3.x or not, I'd like to propose to rename the current repository 
servicemix5 to servicemix, as this repository should contain next 
ServiceMix releases (we can move the current code base in a new branch 
servicemix-4.9.x and start the new codebase for ServiceMix 5 on trunk). 
It means we should also rename the git repository in Apache and Github.


Regards
Krzysztof


--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Rename the servicemix5 repository

Ok, we can also postpone it to point when we start ServiceMix 6 
somewhere in the future (assumed ServiceMix 5 as Karaf 3 line). I have 
proposed it now, because I think there are not too many developers 
working on servicemix5 repository now and it should have less side 
effects now.



On 16.02.2014 16:35, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

I'm ok with this name change as long as it has no side effects with the
developments.

Else, I think it is acceptable to have a servicemix 4.9 developed under a
repository named servicemix 5; consider it as when you start a new project
and you give it the version 0.0.1-SNAPSHOT with the meaning of a "version
that is not yet 1.0.0"



Il domenica 16 febbraio 2014, Krzysztof Sobkowiak 
ha scritto:


Hi all

Apart from the result of the vote about releasing ServiceMix based on Karf
3.x or not, I'd like to propose to rename the current repository
servicemix5 to servicemix, as this repository should contain next
ServiceMix releases (we can move the current code base in a new branch
servicemix-4.9.x and start the new codebase for ServiceMix 5 on trunk). It
means we should also rename the git repository in Apache and Github.

Regards
Krzysztof


--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center <
http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak




--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: SMX5: Focusing on the core


Hallo Raul

Yes, we want to achieve it be restarting ServiceMix 5 form scratch and 
make it a custom Karaf assembly including Camel, CXF and ActiveMQ. The 
rest components can be installed from features having a separate  
lifecycle. I'd like the other components to be also easily installable 
on vanilla Karaf. I think, the components you mentioned (Akka, Activiti, 
ElasticSearch / Kibana, DropWizard, vert.x, etc) can be part of Karaf 
Enterprise Features subproject mentioned by Jean-Baptiste, because 
people may want to install the features in their enterprise applications 
build on Karaf.  I think, the best place for all enterprise features 
will be a Karaf subproject. The subproject can have a separate 
lifecycle, the features can be installed in vanilla Karaf or can be 
installed in ServiceMix (e.g. using shell commands proposed by you.


Regards
Krzysztof



On 16.02.2014 19:58, Raul Kripalani wrote:

Hello guys,

One of the things I'd like to discuss is our approach to modularise the
additional capabilities that SMX5 provides on top of "the core" (Karaf +
Camel + CXF + AMQ), e.g. Activiti integration, Akka integration, JMS
logging appender, etc.

I would like to shift these elements to a separate "modules" repository, in
a manner analogous to the "bundles" repository of SMX [1]. In my opinion,
they should not be part of the default SMX5 assembly, and they should have
a separate lifecycle.

SMX has 4 big direct dependencies: Karaf, Camel, CXF and AMQ. In the
future, I would expect a new SMX release whenever one of these 4 projects
release upstream (ideally!). This is definitely something we can control,
especially because many members of the SMX community also belong to those
upstream communities.

Any other projects, e.g. Akka, Activiti, perhaps ElasticSearch / Kibana,
DropWizard, vert.x, etc. anything we may want to add as a "capability" to
SMX in the future, should have independent release cycles.

Then I would provide a Karaf shell so that users can "pull" these
capabilities straight from Maven Central:

 karaf@root()> servicemix:module-list
 (finds all the available modules and versions by querying Maven repos)

 karaf@root()> servicemix:module-add akka 1.0.0
 (adds version 1.0.0 of the Akka module)

In reality, these commands would mainly call a bunch of commands from the
"feature" shell behind the curtains. For example, the 2nd command would do
the following:

* Add a feature repo
mvn:org.apache.servicemix.modules/akka/1.0.0/xml/features
* Install a feature also called "akka" from this feature repo.

Basically, modules would have a "contract" such that they'd need to provide
a features repo each + a feature with the same name.

In a nutshell:

   * Let's make SMX leaner by focusing on "the big 4" components.
   * Independent lifecycles for additional modules or capabilities.
   * Upstream dependency upgrades can be controlled and updated locally in a
more granular manner.
   * Set of "servicemix" shell commands to add capabilities which are hosted
and versioned separately from the core.

What do you think?

Regards,

[1] https://github.com/apache/servicemix4-bundles

*Raúl Kripalani*
Apache Camel PMC Member & Committer | Enterprise Architect, Open Source
Integration specialist
http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk




--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Rename the servicemix5 repository


I think this is a good point for the rename.


On 16.02.2014 22:05, Gert Vanthienen wrote:

L.S.,


How about doing the rename when moving the repository to git as the
main repository?  We already have git read-only repositories and I
think everyone by now is using git-svn anyway.  We will probably have
to keep using that for the site, docs, dist areas, ... anyway for a
while.

When we make the move to git as the official (writable) repository, we
could just ask infra to move the codebase into a git repository called
"servicemix" and have both things done in one go.


Regards,

Gert Vanthienen
Regards,

Gert Vanthienen


On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
 wrote:

Hi all

Apart from the result of the vote about releasing ServiceMix based on Karf
3.x or not, I'd like to propose to rename the current repository servicemix5
to servicemix, as this repository should contain next ServiceMix releases
(we can move the current code base in a new branch servicemix-4.9.x and
start the new codebase for ServiceMix 5 on trunk). It means we should also
rename the git repository in Apache and Github.

Regards
Krzysztof


--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Upgrade to Karaf 3

I'm going to prepare a custom Karaf distribution including Camel and 
other components for my company after my vacation. I could eventually 
start with it this week and prepare a code base for ServiceMix as 
exercise ;-)


On 16.02.2014 22:26, Gert Vanthienen wrote:

L.S.,


I'm a bit puzzled by the proposal for a 4.9.0 release using Karaf
2.3.x - I don't say I'm against the idea as such, I'm just trying to
understand what we want to achieve with it.

In my mind, the first thing we should try is whether or not we
actually get a working assembly with Karaf 3.0.x (using the latest
SNAPSHOT, for example).  If that works, why not do a ServiceMix
5.0.0.EA1 or something like that as soon as Karaf 3.0.1 gets released,
so we have an official release out and have something to announce,
blog about, ...  At least then we can start collecting feedback on the
new Karaf 3.0.x based container.  Also, we could focus our efforts on
updating docs, READMEs, ... to that version instead of working on two
different sets of docs.

If things really don't work out at all with Karaf 3.0.x, that's a
different story - I can see how having a stable ServiceMix 5 "preview"
(called 4.9.0 or 5.0.0.BETA or whatever) based on the old Karaf might
buy us some time there, but I would keep that as plan B.  We can
always commit the work done by anyone volunteering to take a stab at
the upgrade to Karaf 3 to a branch and work from there.

I don't think I'll get around to giving the upgrade a go myself, but I
did try some Camel stuff on Karaf 3 yesterday and at least that seemed
to work as normal.  Any volunteers to give that upgrade a try?


Regards,

Gert Vanthienen


On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
 wrote:

Hi

As long as we are going to release the current code base as SMX 4.9,  SMX 5
based on Karaf 3.x is ok for me.

Regards
Krzysztof


On 16.02.2014 14:19, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

Karaf 3 for ServiceMix 5,
Karaf 2.3.3 or 2.3.4 for ServiceMix 4.9


2014-02-16 8:10 GMT+01:00 Achim Nierbeck :


Hi,

As a version 5 suggests a big major change I'd go for karaf 3 also. And
use
the current base for a 4.9 as already suggested.

Regards, Achim

sent from mobile device
Am 16.02.2014 08:03 schrieb "Filippo Balicchia" :


For Serviecemix 5 a prefer to use karaf 3.0.* too.
For me is +1

Regards

--Filippo





2014-02-15 23:17 GMT+01:00 Gert Vanthienen :


L.S.,


In the "Plan for ServiceMix 5" thread, we've seen a few proposals on
how to deal with the upgrade to Karaf 3.  I think this discussion
definitely merits a thread of its own.

Personally, I would prefer to do a ServiceMix 5 release with Karaf 3
if possible, but I'm not sure how stable/unstable this actually is at
the moment.  The 3.0.0 release definitely had a few issues, but a lot
of them have already been addressed and I think I even saw a 3.0.1 on
the roadmap for the next few weeks.

If this delay is all it takes to get that upgrade in ServiceMix 5, I
think we should do that.  However, we do not really know big the
problem is.  Perhaps someone could give it a go and try to figure out
how big of an issue this upgrade is?  The effort should definitely not
be in vain, we can always commit it to another branch and start
working on a later release there if necessary.  Any volunteers?

If we see it will just take a few more weeks to get everything in
order for a Karaf 3-based release, we can always do a release
candidate or two to show the world we're actually moving again and to
get some feedback from the community on where we're headed - that time
can actually come in quite handy to work on docs, for example.
However, if the research shows that things will take too long, we
probably have to come up with a 2.3.x-based release first anyway.


Wdyt?

Gert Vanthienen



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: [jira] [Created] (SM-2239) Error running integration tests on ASF CI machines


I have tried it locally and the itests work.

On 16.02.2014 23:07, Gert Vanthienen (JIRA) wrote:

Gert Vanthienen created SM-2239:
---

  Summary: Error running integration tests on ASF CI machines
  Key: SM-2239
  URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2239
  Project: ServiceMix
   Issue Type: Bug
   Components: itests
 Affects Versions: 5.0.0
 Reporter: Gert Vanthienen


When running the ServiceMix 5 builds on the ASF's Jenkins instance, the itests fail very 
quickly with this error message: "Underlying stream encoding 'ASCII' and input 
paramter for writeStartDocument() method 'UTF-8' do not match."

cfr. 
https://builds.apache.org/job/ServiceMix5/org.apache.servicemix.itests$itests/



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1.5#6160)



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Error with activiti-camel while building servicemix 5 trunk


Hi Cristiano

I could build ServieMix starting with empty maven repository and 
Activiti 5.14. But the Activiti feature can not be installed. The 
feature should be updated by SM-2229.


Regards
Krzysztof

On 16.02.2014 13:35, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

Hi Krzysztof,
I'll make a test as soon as I get back to the computer !

Keep me updated with your tests

Il sabato 15 febbraio 2014, Krzysztof Sobkowiak 
ha scritto:


Hi Cristiano

I could build ServiceMix 5 with activiti 5.14. I only had to apply the
patch for Spring. Otherwise the build fails. But again. My local repository
contains probably some libraries which can be not obtained in when building
with fresh repository

Regards
Krzysztof

On 15.02.2014 23:14, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:

I have just updated activiti to 5.14 and successfully built ServiceMix 5.
But my local copy of ServiceMix contains the patches I have created today.
I'll checkout the fresh sources and try again with activiti 5.14

On 15.02.2014 23:07, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:

I had today problems with compilation of examples caused by the upgrade to
Spring 3.2.4.RELEASE. I have created an issue and attached a patch solving
this problem. Had you any problems with the compilation due the missing
spring-asm library?

On 15.02.2014 22:56, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

yeah,
ServiceMix should be made of Karaf, CXF, Camel and ActiveMQ in my opinion.

However I've changed the version of activiti to 5.14 and it compiles fine,
now I have a problem with compilation of examples...
[INFO] Apache ServiceMix :: Examples :: Akka :: Akka Camel  FAILURE
[16.475s]
[INFO] Apache ServiceMix :: Examples :: Camel Drools . FAILURE [4.400s]
[INFO] Apache ServiceMix :: Examples :: Camel Drools Blueprint  FAILURE
[0.021s]

consequently also assemblies fails (I expect because examples are included
in the distribution).

I'll check tomorrow.
Regards,
Cristiano



2014-02-15 22:47 GMT+01:00 Krzysztof Sobkowiak:

  I think, this feature should be moved in Karaf Enterprise Features, after
the Karaf subproject will be created.


On 15.02.2014 22:38, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:

  Yes. After upgrade to 5.14 it can be removed.

On 15.02.2014 22:36, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

  I see it found them in Alfresco Repository


   
   alfresco.public
   Alfresco Public Repository
   https://maven.alfresco.com/nexus/content/groups/public

   
   true
   
   
   false
   
   

I don't like this approach external repos... they are hard to maintain...




2014-02-15 22:29 GMT+01:00 Cristiano Costantini <
cristiano.costant...@gmail.com>:

   Thank you Krzysztof,

I think that it should build in a clean environment without the need of
artifact in exotic repos,
so for me we should either upgrade activiti to version 5.14 or remove
activiti from ServiceMix 5 main trunk (I don't know how many people use
activiti, I don't).

What do you think?

Cristiano

2014-02-15 22:16 GMT+01:00 Krzysztof Sobkowiak
:

Hi Cristiano

  I had no problem with the build. Probably my local maven repo contains
the missing libraries and I don't have this problem. There is already a
JIRA issue (SM-2229<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2229>)
   to
upgrade Activiti to 5.14.

Regards
Krzysztof


On 15.02.2014 22:11, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

   Hi,

I'm trying to build by myself ServiceMix 5 from the trunk (I've cloned
the
git repo and I'm working on the trunk branch)

but building fails as maven does not resolve version 5.10 of
activiti-camel
(Failed to execute goal on project org.apache.servicemix.
activiti.config:
Could not resolve dependencies for project
org.apache.servicemix.activiti:org.apache.servicemix.activiti.config:




--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Upgrade to Karaf 3

2014-02-17 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak


Hi

I think  somebody should start the vote. We have 2 options:

 * SMX 5 with Karaf 2.3.x and SMX 6 with Karaf 3.x
 * SMX 4.9 with Karaf 2.3.x and SMX 5 with Karaf 3.x

Regards
Krzysztof


On 17.02.2014 16:59, Cristiano Costantini wrote:

I've already repeated my position up to be annoying :-) but I repeat that
for me either solutions are ok
Maybe a quick vote could be the fastest and more democratic way to take a
decision ?s
Could someone please summarize the available options?

Regards,
Cristiano



2014-02-17 16:53 GMT+01:00 Gert Vanthienen :


Hi Raul,


Yeah, I think 4.9.0 is a bit of a strange version number as well.  But
you're also right that some users will take a bit longer to move over
to Karaf 3.   What's more: the version may not even be as temporary
for us as we would hope, perhaps we end up doing another release in
that series if people in the community are asking about another Karaf
2.x based release after this one.

We do want that to be based on the current ServiceMix 5 codebase
(without JBI/NMR) and not on the current ServiceMix 4.x codebase?
Because the latter was the original plan and we failed to get any
contributors to help out with that effort.

I do wonder if we won't end up confusing people as well, when
ServiceMix 4.6.0 suddenly no longer has any JBI/NMR support in there.
We can probably communicate that though, so it might not be that big a
problem, but we might also want to reconsider Krzysztof's proposal to
go with 5.x for the Karaf 2.x-based assemblies without JBI/NMR (and we
can have a few of those, using Karaf 2.3.x and 2.4.x) and use 6.x for
the Karaf 3-based assemblies.

Syncing svn to git

2014-02-17 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak


Hi all

How often are the changes in svn repository synced into the git 
repositories? I still can't see changes for SM-2236 
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2236> in repository in 
git.apache.org nor in Github.


Regards
Krzysztof


--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: [PROPOSAL] Include samples and new dev guide for Karaf 3.0.1

2014-02-18 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

It's a good idea. I'm in too. Shouldn't the email go into the Karaf Dev 
list?


Regards
Krzysztof


On 18.02.2014 15:53, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:

Hi all,

You probably saw that we did a good job in the quickstart, update 
notes, and user guide for Karaf 3.0.0:

http://karaf.apache.org/manual/latest/quick-start.html
http://karaf.apache.org/manual/latest/update-notes.html
http://karaf.apache.org/manual/latest/users-guide/index.html

I started to work on a complete refactoring of the dev guide on a 
local git branch.
I already started to discussed with Christian to provide dev examples 
directly in the Karaf distribution. It's a refactoring and huge 
extension to the existing demo folder.


The purpose is illustrate the content in the dev guide with "real" 
examples, covering all Karaf features (especially the enterprise ones, 
like JPA, CDI, etc).


I will push the samples module structure.
Christian already said he's in to help, but any help is welcome ;)

I should be able to push the structure and samples frame tonight.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Regards
JB



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: [DISCUSS] Which assemblies to keep around?

2014-02-19 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak


Hi all

In the new code base I'm preparing for the Karaf 3.x line I'll provide 
only one assembly. The other can be added later if needed.


We should decide what to do with the full assembly in the current 
servicemix5 codebase. The full assembly makes actually problems with 
upgrade to newer Karaf version. Another problem - as soon as we upgrade 
to Karaf version including Hibernate in enterprise features (e.g. 2.3.4 
or 2.4.0) the hibernate bundles will be included in the full 
distribution, but it is not allowed (due to the LGPL license)


Regards
Krzysztof

On 19.02.2014 13:18, Filippo Balicchia wrote:

Hi,
i'm  full assembly user, but the solution proposed from Raul  imho
is interesting.
Say that keep the default assembly should be OK.

Regards

--Filippo


2014-02-19 12:51 GMT+01:00 Raul Kripalani :


I agree with Freeman. Even if you're an avid user, you probably won't use
*all* the dependencies that we bundle in the full distribution. Conclusion:
for most users, with the full distro we're delivering a large footprint
overhead. Think of it: just by embedding all of Camel features,
transitively we include hundreds of dependencies. Even if most
organizations using Camel typically end up using around 20 components, not
more...

On the other hand, the goal of the full distro was legit: make sure that
SMX doesn't ever need access to the Internet. But the current approach is
like "killing flies with a bazooka".

What I propose is to create a Karaf command
"servicemix:bundles-persist-in-local-repo" which uses the bundle locations
of all installed bundles to copy them to the SMX system/ directory.

So basically, to create a distribution that is both (a) suitable for
offline usage and (b) customized for your organization, you would follow
this workflow:

   1. Download the default SMX distro. Start it.
   2. Install all features you will need for your organization (camel-ftp,
camel-mongodb, hibernate, activiti, etc.). This step installs transitive
dependencies too.
   3. Call the servicemix:bundles-persist-in-local-repo command, which will
persist all bundles in the system/ directory.
   4. Stop SMX.
   5. Delete the data/ directory.
   6. Voilà, you have a SMX distro adapted to your organization which is
suitable for offline usage.

We could probably group step 4 and step 5 into a single command
servicemix:shutdown-and-clean, or enhance the original Karaf shutdown
command to include a --clean switch, which deletes the data directory just
before exiting the Java process.

WYDT?

Regards,

*Raúl Kripalani*
Apache Camel PMC Member & Committer | Enterprise Architect, Open Source
Integration specialist
http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk

On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Freeman Fang 
wrote:
I'd say keep the default assembly should be OK, only including bundles
used by default boot features should be good.
－
Freeman(Yue) Fang

Red Hat, Inc.
FuseSource is now part of Red Hat



On 2014-2-19, at 下午6:46, Gert Vanthienen wrote:


L.S.,


Just noticed Krzysztof's comment about the how and why of the
apache-servicemix-full assembly in JIRA and think it's worth having a
quick discussion about which of these assemblies we want to keep
around going forward.

Right now, we have 3 variations of our assembly in ServiceMix 5:
- The default assembly has a setup that includes the base CXF, Camel
and ActiveMQ bits and preinstalls those as boot features
- The minimal assembly actually has none of these things preinstalled,
it's just a plain Karaf with the feature URLs (among a few other
things) preconfigured - not sure how much this one is used though
- The full assembly is identical to default assembly, but the /system
folder contains all bundles for all optional features.  This makes it
easy for people to use ServiceMix on servers that have no direct
connection to the internet.  This one is probably used a bit more (I
usually install this one myself), but we are struggling to keep it
below the maximum 35000 bytes distribution size (which is already
an exception to the rule at the ASF) and as issue
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2241 is showing, it is prone
to be impacted by any kind of error in any of our dependencies'
features files.

For ServiceMix 5 and other upcoming versions, which of these
assemblies do we want to keep around?


Regards,

Gert Vanthienen





--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove non-core modules?

2014-02-21 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak


Hi

I'd like to have activiti feature too, as long as it can be moved into 
the Karaf Features subproject. The other modules - we don't need to keep 
it in core servicemix, but I think, someone has done a work to provide 
these features. We can eventually keep it at least as samples for people 
ho want to use such features in the future.


B.t.w., I think whether we could provide something like ServiceMix by 
Example (similar to Fuse by Example). We could add there samples/demos 
which we don't want to include in ServiceMix distribution.


Regards
Krzysztof

On 21.02.2014 18:02, Gert Vanthienen wrote:

o use such fL.S.,


As suggested by a lot of people over the past week , we should focus
on the core assembly before anything else.  If we look at the current
ServiceMix 5 project layout, that would mean we have 3 non-core bits
in there that we would need to think about.

The first one is the "activiti" module.  This seems to be a pretty
good match for our core technology set.  So I would suggest we keep
that around for now, once it moves to a Karaf subproject or (even
better) to the Activiti project itself, we can just reuse that effort
and remove our bits.

The two things we do may want to remove are the "akka" and "logging" modules.

The "akka" bits are a personal experiment of mine and I'm not sure
anyone is using that at all. Also, that technology is probably a bit
alien to a lot of people in the community, so it probably makes no
sense keeping it around.  I would propose we just remove that
entirely.

For "logging": I doubt a lot of people are using that as well.  I was
first thinking of adding a demo using Camel Pax-Logging instead, but
that seems a bit harder than I expected.  Regardless, this is another
module where we should ask ourselves whether we want to keep it around
(for now) or not.


Regards,

Gert Vanthienen



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove non-core modules?

2014-02-21 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

We don't want to add activiti to Karaf core only to Enterprise Features 
subproject. I think, Activiti can be used in both, in ESB solutions or 
in enterprise solutions (and should be usable outside ServiceMix, e.g. 
in vanilla Karaf) and Karaf Enterprise features is very good place for it.


On 21.02.2014 19:29, Raul Kripalani wrote:

I don't understand why we'd want to burden Apache Karaf - a project focused
on providing an OSGi ecosystem - with server components that are clearly
integration-related.

BPM and OSGi have nothing to do with each other by bare nature, nor is
Activiti implementing any OSGi specification or Java EE spec.

In my opinion, building "bridges" between Karaf/OSGi and
integration-related components is the true spirit of the SMX project.

Therefore, I'd be -1 to divest this module.

Regards,
Raúl.

On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 6:14 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak <
krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> wrote:


Hi

I'd like to have activiti feature too, as long as it can be moved into the
Karaf Features subproject. The other modules - we don't need to keep it in
core servicemix, but I think, someone has done a work to provide these
features. We can eventually keep it at least as samples for people ho want
to use such features in the future.

B.t.w., I think whether we could provide something like ServiceMix by
Example (similar to Fuse by Example). We could add there samples/demos
which we don't want to include in ServiceMix distribution.

Regards
Krzysztof

On 21.02.2014 18:02, Gert Vanthienen wrote:


o use such fL.S.,



As suggested by a lot of people over the past week , we should focus
on the core assembly before anything else.  If we look at the current
ServiceMix 5 project layout, that would mean we have 3 non-core bits
in there that we would need to think about.

The first one is the "activiti" module.  This seems to be a pretty
good match for our core technology set.  So I would suggest we keep
that around for now, once it moves to a Karaf subproject or (even
better) to the Activiti project itself, we can just reuse that effort
and remove our bits.

The two things we do may want to remove are the "akka" and "logging"
modules.

The "akka" bits are a personal experiment of mine and I'm not sure
anyone is using that at all. Also, that technology is probably a bit
alien to a lot of people in the community, so it probably makes no
sense keeping it around.  I would propose we just remove that
entirely.

For "logging": I doubt a lot of people are using that as well.  I was
first thinking of adding a demo using Camel Pax-Logging instead, but
that seems a bit harder than I expected.  Regardless, this is another
module where we should ask ourselves whether we want to keep it around
(for now) or not.


Regards,

Gert Vanthienen



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center <
http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak




--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

[DISCUSS] ServiceMix features

2014-02-21 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak


Hi

In the discussions about the ServiceMix future and the future of 
ServiceMix features it was mentioned about moving some non-core features 
into the Karaf Enterprise Features subproject. Another people think, the 
Karaf subproject is not too good place for such features like Activiti. 
Such features could be also extracted into a separate subproject in 
ServiceMix which could have a separate lifecycle, but we don't have too 
many such features to create a subproject for them.


In the code base for ServiceMix 6 (working version for the Karaf 3.x 
line as not decided yet which version will have the SMX based on Karaf 
3.x) I'd like to prepare 3 feature repositories


 * servicemix-core - core features which will be integral part of
   servicemix, not installable on other Karaf distributions
 * servicemix-esb - non-core features like current Activiti integration
   or missing connection factory for ActiveMQ. This repository should
   provide features which will be used to build the ServiceMix
   distribution and which can be also used outside the ServiceMix
   distribution, e.g. in Karaf. It should have no dependency to core
   ServiceMix. Currently we have not too many such features and some of
   them could be moved into the original project or into the Karaf
   Enterprise Features subproject (but id doesn't exist yet and many
   people doesn't like the idea for moving the esb specific features
   into Karaf). In the future we can have more esb features and we can
   extract a separate subproject having own lifecycle,
 * servicemix-examples - I think, the examples should be separated from
   other features

What do you think about this idea?

Best regards and have a nice weekend
Krzysztof


--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: [DISCUSS] ServiceMix features

2014-02-23 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

Yes, of course the examples features will be always part of servicemix
repository and will have the same lifecycle. Only servicemix-features can
be extracted once as a separate project.
On Feb 22, 2014 10:26 AM, "Jean-Baptiste Onofré"  wrote:

> Hi Krzysztof,
>
> if I agree in the content, I'm not sure about the name.
>
> As ServiceMix is itself an ESB, I would think about different name.
> It's just a question of wording.
>
> servicemix-core sounds good.
> I would name servicemix-esb as servicemix-features to be generic. The
> Karaf Features Enterprises repository can refer to these features IMHO.
>
> Agree for the examples, but it could be part of the same sourcecode repo
> (even if we have a separate life cycle).
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 02/21/2014 08:33 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> In the discussions about the ServiceMix future and the future of
>> ServiceMix features it was mentioned about moving some non-core features
>> into the Karaf Enterprise Features subproject. Another people think, the
>> Karaf subproject is not too good place for such features like Activiti.
>> Such features could be also extracted into a separate subproject in
>> ServiceMix which could have a separate lifecycle, but we don't have too
>> many such features to create a subproject for them.
>>
>> In the code base for ServiceMix 6 (working version for the Karaf 3.x
>> line as not decided yet which version will have the SMX based on Karaf
>> 3.x) I'd like to prepare 3 feature repositories
>>
>>   * servicemix-core - core features which will be integral part of
>> servicemix, not installable on other Karaf distributions
>>   * servicemix-esb - non-core features like current Activiti integration
>> or missing connection factory for ActiveMQ. This repository should
>> provide features which will be used to build the ServiceMix
>> distribution and which can be also used outside the ServiceMix
>> distribution, e.g. in Karaf. It should have no dependency to core
>> ServiceMix. Currently we have not too many such features and some of
>> them could be moved into the original project or into the Karaf
>> Enterprise Features subproject (but id doesn't exist yet and many
>> people doesn't like the idea for moving the esb specific features
>> into Karaf). In the future we can have more esb features and we can
>> extract a separate subproject having own lifecycle,
>>   * servicemix-examples - I think, the examples should be separated from
>> other features
>>
>> What do you think about this idea?
>>
>> Best regards and have a nice weekend
>> Krzysztof
>>
>>
>>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbono...@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>

Re: [DISCUSS] ServiceMix features

2014-02-24 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

Hi Gert

Yes, my proposal is to split the features. Probably now we have nothing
what could be placed in core features, but I give you an example. Some
weeks ago we had some activemq features overwritten in servicemix
features. If I want to include servicemix features in my distribution or
include them in vanilla Karaf, I want to have such features like
Activiti or Akka, not overwritten ActiveMQ features. I'll probably use
another version of ActiveMQ. The overwritten ActiveMQ features were very
servicemix specific. The purpose of core features is a place for such
features which are necessary tobuild the servicemix distribution and
could make problems if they were included in the "public" features. We
can live with one features file (+ separate file for examples). But when
we need to define in the future some features like these for ActiveMQ,
they must be placed in separate file.

Best regards
Krzysztof

On 24.02.2014 21:01, Gert Vanthienen wrote:

Hi Krzysztof,

So, just to be clear, the proposal is to split up what we have in
assemblies/src/main/filtered-resources/features.xml into multiple
features descriptor (cfr.
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/servicemix/smx5/trunk/assemblies/src/main/filtered-resources/features.xml?view=markup),
right?

Not sure how you would discriminate between the first two things
you're proposing - shouldn't any feature we build be installable on
another Karaf distribution anyway? Perhaps we can just keep those two
together for now: if I look at the current features.xml file, it could
contain everything that doesn't start with example-*. How about just
keeping the name for that one the same as it is right now?
apache-servicemix--features.xml seems to match the pattern
that other projects use for their descriptor pretty well already.

If we want, we can definitely move the examples into a separate
features files. It would make it easier for people to add the Apache
ServiceMix features to their distribution without introducing the
examples (which they're probably not interested in in that scenario
anyways). So I'm +1 for moving those features apart, perhaps we can
just attach it with another classifier,
apache-servicemix--examples.xml perhaps?

In my mind, we can best do that right now in the ServiceMix 5 codebase
as well. I assume we want to branch that off into a Karaf 3.x based
ServiceMix 6 line pretty soon anyway, so the more of these changes we
do now, the more these two lines of code are alike and the easier we
will make it for ourselves to merge changes back and forth afterwards.

Regards,

Gert Vanthienen

On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 8:33 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
wrote:

In the discussions about the ServiceMix future and the future of ServiceMix
features it was mentioned about moving some non-core features into the Karaf
Enterprise Features subproject. Another people think, the Karaf subproject
is not too good place for such features like Activiti. Such features could
be also extracted into a separate subproject in ServiceMix which could have
a separate lifecycle, but we don't have too many such features to create a
subproject for them.

In the code base for ServiceMix 6 (working version for the Karaf 3.x line as
not decided yet which version will have the SMX based on Karaf 3.x) I'd like
to prepare 3 feature repositories

* servicemix-core - core features which will be integral part of
servicemix, not installable on other Karaf distributions
* servicemix-esb - non-core features like current Activiti integration
or missing connection factory for ActiveMQ. This repository should
provide features which will be used to build the ServiceMix
distribution and which can be also used outside the ServiceMix
distribution, e.g. in Karaf. It should have no dependency to core
ServiceMix. Currently we have not too many such features and some of
them could be moved into the original project or into the Karaf
Enterprise Features subproject (but id doesn't exist yet and many
people doesn't like the idea for moving the esb specific features
into Karaf). In the future we can have more esb features and we can
extract a separate subproject having own lifecycle,
* servicemix-examples - I think, the examples should be separated from
other features

What do you think about this idea?

Best regards and have a nice weekend
Krzysztof

--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

Re: Decouple examples in assembly from our POMs?

2014-03-03 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak


I think it's a goo idea.

On 03.03.2014 15:49, Gert Vanthienen wrote:

L.S.,


While applying some POM fixes just a minute ago, I noticed our
examples are using our own parent POM.  Wouldn't it better to have
examples in the assembly that are more self-contained and do not
depend on information in our other POM files?  That way, people can
just copy the example and modify it for their own environment with
minimal effort.

We already have resource filtering in place for those examples POMs
and we have a separate copy of the examples parent file in the
assembly, so the changes required should be minimal.


Regards,

Gert Vanthienen



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

[DISCUSS] ServiceMix archetypes

2014-03-04 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak


Hi all

Currently the archetypes are provided by a separate repository 
servicemix-archetypes. There are many archetypes for features no more 
supported in ServiceMix 5 (e.g. jbi). I don't know whether the other 
archetypes (e.g. jaxws wsdl first or code first) are compatible with the 
actual state in ServiceMix 5.


I think, we should provide a set of archetypes which are compatible with 
ServiceMix 5 (and later a set of archetypes compatible with ServiceMix 
6). For this purpose we need a separate versioning of archetypes for 
ServiceMix 4, 5, ... I think the best way would be the same version like 
ServiceMix version - the user could use the archetype version  5.0.0 and 
could be sure the archetype generates a project compatible with 
ServiceMix 5.0.0 (similar to Karaf or Fabric8 archetypes).


I'd like to propose 2 solutions:

 * merge the archetypes (only the subset) into ServiceMix 5 code base -
   the archetypes would have the same life cycle like ServiceMix. Each
   ServiceMix would provide the set of archetypes for features
   available in the given version. This solution would generate a new
   archetypes for each ServiceMix release, even if nothing changes in
   the archetypes between the releases but this solution woul make the
   archetype usage easier - user would take the archetype version x for
   ServiceMix release x.
 * move the current archetypes in servicemix-archetypes repository into
   a separate branch and provide the ServiceMix 5 archetypes on trunk.
   We should also change the versioning on the trunk - I prefer the
   same version like the version of ServiceMix (in this case 5.0.0) pr
   something like 5.2014.x for SMX 5, 6.2014.x for SMX 6, to
   preserve the versioning scheme used currently and distinguish
   between the major ServiceMix releases. Using this solution we could
   release new archetypes only if something will be changed, but it
   will be difficult to find a version which is proper for the given
   ServiceMix version.

I prefer the first solution. What is your opinion?

Best regards
Krzysztof



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: [DISCUSS] ServiceMix archetypes

2014-03-04 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

One clarification for point 2: Using the versioning scheme 5.2014.x we 
could release new archetypes only if something will be changed, but it 
will be difficult to find a version which is proper for the given 
ServiceMix version.


On 04.03.2014 20:27, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:

Hi all

Currently the archetypes are provided by a separate repository 
servicemix-archetypes. There are many archetypes for features no more 
supported in ServiceMix 5 (e.g. jbi). I don't know whether the other 
archetypes (e.g. jaxws wsdl first or code first) are compatible with 
the actual state in ServiceMix 5.


I think, we should provide a set of archetypes which are compatible 
with ServiceMix 5 (and later a set of archetypes compatible with 
ServiceMix 6). For this purpose we need a separate versioning of 
archetypes for ServiceMix 4, 5, ... I think the best way would be the 
same version like ServiceMix version - the user could use the 
archetype version  5.0.0 and could be sure the archetype generates a 
project compatible with ServiceMix 5.0.0 (similar to Karaf or Fabric8 
archetypes).


I'd like to propose 2 solutions:

  * merge the archetypes (only the subset) into ServiceMix 5 code base
- the archetypes would have the same life cycle like ServiceMix.
Each ServiceMix would provide the set of archetypes for features
available in the given version. This solution would generate a new
archetypes for each ServiceMix release, even if nothing changes in
the archetypes between the releases but this solution woul make
the archetype usage easier - user would take the archetype version
x for ServiceMix release x.
  * move the current archetypes in servicemix-archetypes repository
into a separate branch and provide the ServiceMix 5 archetypes on
trunk. We should also change the versioning on the trunk - I
prefer the same version like the version of ServiceMix (in this
case 5.0.0) pr something like 5.2014.x for SMX 5, 6.2014.x for SMX
6, to preserve the versioning scheme used currently and
distinguish between the major ServiceMix releases. Using this
solution we could release new archetypes only if something will be
changed, but it will be difficult to find a version which is
proper for the given ServiceMix version.

I prefer the first solution. What is your opinion?

Best regards
Krzysztof



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: [DISCUSS] ServiceMix features

2014-03-04 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

I would suggest 'internal' instead of 'overrides'. The features
repository should contain not only the overrides but also servicemix
features which are not intended to be installed in other distributions,
e.g. any servicemix specific commands or configurations

On 24.02.2014 22:10, Gert Vanthienen wrote:

Hi Krzysztof,

Yeah, if we have to add those kinds of overrides again, it would
definitely make sense to move those into a separate file as well.
Looks like we still have one such feature around with the jax-rs
feature in that file (not sure that one is still required though).
Perhaps we should call that feature 'overrides' or something like that
to clarify what it does?

Regards,

Gert Vanthienen

On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
wrote:

Hi Gert

Yes, my proposal is to split the features. Probably now we have nothing what
could be placed in core features, but I give you an example. Some weeks ago
we had some activemq features overwritten in servicemix features. If I want
to include servicemix features in my distribution or include them in vanilla
Karaf, I want to have such features like Activiti or Akka, not overwritten
ActiveMQ features. I'll probably use another version of ActiveMQ. The
overwritten ActiveMQ features were very servicemix specific. The purpose of
core features is a place for such features which are necessary tobuild the
servicemix distribution and could make problems if they were included in the
"public" features. We can live with one features file (+ separate file for
examples). But when we need to define in the future some features like these
for ActiveMQ, they must be placed in separate file.

Best regards
Krzysztof

On 24.02.2014 21:01, Gert Vanthienen wrote:

Hi Krzysztof,

So, just to be clear, the proposal is to split up what we have in
assemblies/src/main/filtered-resources/features.xml into multiple
features descriptor (cfr.

http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/servicemix/smx5/trunk/assemblies/src/main/filtered-resources/features.xml?view=markup),
right?

Regards,

Gert Vanthienen

On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 8:33 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
wrote:

In the discussions about the ServiceMix future and the future of
ServiceMix
features it was mentioned about moving some non-core features into the
Karaf
Enterprise Features subproject. Another people think, the Karaf
subproject
is not too good place for such features like Activiti. Such features
could
be also extracted into a separate subproject in ServiceMix which could
have
a separate lifecycle, but we don't have too many such features to create
a
subproject for them.

In the code base for ServiceMix 6 (working version for the Karaf 3.x line
as
not decided yet which version will have the SMX based on Karaf 3.x) I'd
like
to prepare 3 feature repositories

Re: [DISCUSS] ServiceMix archetypes

2014-03-06 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak


Hi

The archetypes form servicemix-archetypes have groupId 
org.apache.servicemix.tooling. Should the archetypes in servicemix5 have 
the same groupId or org.apache.servicemix.archetypes?


Best regards
Krzysztof

On 04.03.2014 20:30, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:

Hi,

+1 for point 1 (even if the archetypes are not really tight to a 
ServiceMix version).


Regards
JB

On 03/04/2014 08:27 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:

Hi all

Currently the archetypes are provided by a separate repository
servicemix-archetypes. There are many archetypes for features no more
supported in ServiceMix 5 (e.g. jbi). I don't know whether the other
archetypes (e.g. jaxws wsdl first or code first) are compatible with the
actual state in ServiceMix 5.

I think, we should provide a set of archetypes which are compatible with
ServiceMix 5 (and later a set of archetypes compatible with ServiceMix
6). For this purpose we need a separate versioning of archetypes for
ServiceMix 4, 5, ... I think the best way would be the same version like
ServiceMix version - the user could use the archetype version 5.0.0 and
could be sure the archetype generates a project compatible with
ServiceMix 5.0.0 (similar to Karaf or Fabric8 archetypes).

I'd like to propose 2 solutions:

  * merge the archetypes (only the subset) into ServiceMix 5 code base -
the archetypes would have the same life cycle like ServiceMix. Each
ServiceMix would provide the set of archetypes for features
available in the given version. This solution would generate a new
archetypes for each ServiceMix release, even if nothing changes in
the archetypes between the releases but this solution woul make the
archetype usage easier - user would take the archetype version x for
ServiceMix release x.
  * move the current archetypes in servicemix-archetypes repository into
a separate branch and provide the ServiceMix 5 archetypes on trunk.
We should also change the versioning on the trunk - I prefer the
same version like the version of ServiceMix (in this case 5.0.0) pr
something like 5.2014.x for SMX 5, 6.2014.x for SMX 6, to
preserve the versioning scheme used currently and distinguish
between the major ServiceMix releases. Using this solution we could
release new archetypes only if something will be changed, but it
will be difficult to find a version which is proper for the given
ServiceMix version.

I prefer the first solution. What is your opinion?

Best regards
Krzysztof



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak






--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: [DISCUSS] ServiceMix archetypes

2014-03-06 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak


Which groupId should be used?

1. org.apache.servicemix.tooling
2. org.apache.servicemix.archetypes



On 06.03.2014 20:37, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:

Hi

The archetypes form servicemix-archetypes have groupId 
org.apache.servicemix.tooling. Should the archetypes in servicemix5 
have the same groupId or org.apache.servicemix.archetypes?


Best regards
Krzysztof

On 04.03.2014 20:30, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:

Hi,

+1 for point 1 (even if the archetypes are not really tight to a 
ServiceMix version).


Regards
JB

On 03/04/2014 08:27 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:

Hi all

Currently the archetypes are provided by a separate repository
servicemix-archetypes. There are many archetypes for features no more
supported in ServiceMix 5 (e.g. jbi). I don't know whether the other
archetypes (e.g. jaxws wsdl first or code first) are compatible with 
the

actual state in ServiceMix 5.

I think, we should provide a set of archetypes which are compatible 
with

ServiceMix 5 (and later a set of archetypes compatible with ServiceMix
6). For this purpose we need a separate versioning of archetypes for
ServiceMix 4, 5, ... I think the best way would be the same version 
like

ServiceMix version - the user could use the archetype version 5.0.0 and
could be sure the archetype generates a project compatible with
ServiceMix 5.0.0 (similar to Karaf or Fabric8 archetypes).

I'd like to propose 2 solutions:

  * merge the archetypes (only the subset) into ServiceMix 5 code 
base -

the archetypes would have the same life cycle like ServiceMix. Each
ServiceMix would provide the set of archetypes for features
available in the given version. This solution would generate a new
archetypes for each ServiceMix release, even if nothing changes in
the archetypes between the releases but this solution woul make the
archetype usage easier - user would take the archetype version x 
for

ServiceMix release x.
  * move the current archetypes in servicemix-archetypes repository 
into

a separate branch and provide the ServiceMix 5 archetypes on trunk.
We should also change the versioning on the trunk - I prefer the
same version like the version of ServiceMix (in this case 5.0.0) pr
something like 5.2014.x for SMX 5, 6.2014.x for SMX 6, to
preserve the versioning scheme used currently and distinguish
between the major ServiceMix releases. Using this solution we could
release new archetypes only if something will be changed, but it
will be difficult to find a version which is proper for the given
ServiceMix version.

I prefer the first solution. What is your opinion?

Best regards
Krzysztof 




--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Rebranding for ServiceMix 5 underway!

2014-03-07 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak


Hi Raul

Where's the logo?

Best regards
Krzysztof

On 07.03.2014 21:46, Raul Kripalani wrote:

Hello team!

To go along with our launch of SMX5, I've been working hard on (1) 
rebranding our image and (2) revamping our website. We have an 
extremely powerful product, but in my daily work with customers I 
notice we get undervalued due to our old-fashioned and outdated website.


With regards to (1), I felt that the emblem in SMX logo was already a 
masterpiece, so I didn't touch it (asked Lukasz Dywicki for the vector 
graphics). However, the type/font could do with a more modern look. 
Gert also suggested to somehow include the Apache feather in the logo.


So after several iterations I combined both ideas and overlaid it on 
grey background -- which I think could be part of our color palette 
for the new website (white background variations also planned). Please 
find attached the result and let me know what you think ;-) The 
attributes I was going for are: elegant, modern, sleek.


Concerning (2), I suggest that we go in the direction of the Apache 
Mesos [1] site and embrace Middleman [2] as a static site generator, 
incl. Twitter Bootstrap, Sass, and all those fancy frontend frameworks 
of the current age ;-) I've been experimenting with the toolset and 
it's powerful, yet simple enough to author content with our beloved 
Markdown syntax!


I'm working on a prototype of the website, which I will push to GitHub 
and post here for us to collaborate on.


For now, I'll be happy to get some feedback about the logo.

[1] http://mesos.apache.org/
[2] http://middlemanapp.com/

Regards,

*Raúl Kripalani*
Apache Camel PMC Member & Committer | Enterprise Architect, Open 
Source Integration specialist

http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
http://blog.raulkr.net <http://blog.raulkr.net/> | twitter: @raulvk



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Apache ServiceMix 5.0.0 later this week?

2014-03-11 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

Great idea. We can get more feedback from users and fix them (and the 
outstanding issues) for 5.0.1. I have started migration of the 
archetypes. I'll try to add them this week, but I have also a lot to do 
for the training I'm preparing  for Thursday and Friday.


Best regards
Krzysztof

On 11.03.2014 15:38, Gert Vanthienen wrote:

se at the end of the week - I should be able to make
some time available for it on Friday.



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ServiceMix 5.0.0 (take 2)

2014-03-17 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak


Hi

I have just built ServiceMix from sources on Linux and tested it. I have 
found no problems. The staged release 5.0.0 looks good too.


Best regards
Krzysztof

On 17.03.2014 14:50, Gert Vanthienen wrote:

L.S.,


We've uploaded a release for Apache ServiceMix 5.0.0 to
   https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheservicemix-1005/

An overview of issues fixed in this release can be found in JIRA at
   https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM/fixforversion/12324078

The scm tag is available on
   http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx5/tags/servicemix-5.0.0/

Please vote to approve this release:

[ ] +1 Approve the release
[ ] -1 Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)

This vote will be open for 72 hours.


Regards,

Gert Vanthienen



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache ServiceMix 5.0.0 released!

2014-03-23 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak


Hi

I have installed camel-jms and added following code into each of the 
both routes and it worked form me


interface="javax.jms.ConnectionFactory" />
class="org.apache.activemq.camel.component.ActiveMQComponent">




Best regards
Krzysztof

On 23.03.2014 19:27, wabrit wrote:

I've just installed ServiceMix 5.0.0 and followed the quick start guide. I'm
unable to get the  activemq sample
<http://servicemix.apache.org/docs/5.0.x/quickstart/activemq.html>   to
work. When I deploy the first blueprint XML file on this page I get the
following error in the Karaf console:



I'm a complete newbie to Karaf/ServiceMix, but the same sample worked fine
for me in ServiceMix 4.5.3.

Running features:list | grep activemq gives the following:

[installed  ] [5.9.0] activemq-client activemq-5.9.0
ActiveMQ client libraries
[installed  ] [5.9.0] activemqactivemq-5.9.0
ActiveMQ broker libraries
[installed  ] [5.9.0] activemq-broker-noweb   activemq-5.9.0
Full ActiveMQ broker with default configuration
[uninstalled] [5.9.0] activemq-broker activemq-5.9.0
Full ActiveMQ broker with default configuration and web console
*[uninstalled]* [5.9.0] activemq-camel
activemq-5.9.0
[uninstalled] [5.9.0] activemq-web-consoleactivemq-5.9.0
[uninstalled] [5.9.0] activemq-blueprint  activemq-5.9.0
[installed  ] [5.0.0] activemq-service
servicemix-features-5.0.0
[uninstalled] [5.0.0] examples-activemq-camel-blueprint
servicemix-examples-5.0.0

I also noticed there is no *camel-jms* directory under the
/system/org/apache/camel/ directory (unlike in the 4.5.3 installation).




--
View this message in context: 
http://servicemix.396122.n5.nabble.com/ANNOUNCE-Apache-ServiceMix-5-0-0-released-tp5719674p5719676.html
Sent from the ServiceMix - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache ServiceMix 5.0.0 released!

2014-03-23 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak


Hi

I have installed camel-jms using

features:install camel-jms

I think, the activemq camel component is from any reason no more 
registered automatically. Probably from the same reason why activemeq 
does not automatically registers jms connection factory automatically. 
ServiceMix 4.5.3 includes activemq 5.7.0 and does not have this change.


I'll open an issue for this problem.

Best regards
Krzysztof




On 23.03.2014 21:44, wabrit wrote:

Hi Krzysztof

Many thanks for your reply.

Could you tell me how you installed camel-jms - is it just running ?

Also, if I recall correctly, I didn't have to do any of these extra steps to
get the quickstart examples to work in 4.5.3, so do the documents need
updating for 5.0.0?

Regards

Alan



--
View this message in context: 
http://servicemix.396122.n5.nabble.com/ANNOUNCE-Apache-ServiceMix-5-0-0-released-tp5719674p5719678.html
Sent from the ServiceMix - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache ServiceMix 5.0.0 released!

2014-03-23 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

I have opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2269 to track 
this problem


Best regards
Krzysztof

On 23.03.2014 22:08, wabrit wrote:

Thanks Krzysztof - with your recommended changes I was able to get the
quickstart activemq examples working again.

Kind regards

Alan



--
View this message in context: 
http://servicemix.396122.n5.nabble.com/ANNOUNCE-Apache-ServiceMix-5-0-0-released-tp5719674p5719680.html
Sent from the ServiceMix - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving the servicemix5 codebase to git

2014-03-25 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak


It's good idea.

Best regards
Krzysztof

On 25.03.2014 13:58, Gert Vanthienen wrote:

L.S.,


It's been brought up a few times before that it would be nice to be
able to switch from SVN to git. Now that we have the entire ServiceMix
5 code living in a single source repository again, that would make a
good first candidate to make the switch.  We could ask infra@ to
convert the contents of SVN and make that our main servicemix.git
repository.


Wdyt?

Gert Vanthienen



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Code formatting for Apache projects

2014-04-04 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak


Hi

I have started this thread once in Karaf list. Do we have any common 
formatting rules/configuration we should use when developing ServiceMix? 
Jean-Baptiste has mentioned following location: 
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx3/branches/servicemix-3.2/build/src/main/resources/ 
I have also found another location containing the eclipse configuration 
too - 
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx3/branches/servicemix-3.2/etc/eclipse/ 
(or in trunk 
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx3/trunk/etc/eclipse/)


Should we use one of these configurations?

Best regards
Krzysztof


On 16.01.2014 08:55, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:

Agree Dan,

I just want to review the formatter first and provide the IntelliJ one 
too.


Regards
JB

On 01/16/2014 08:31 AM, Dan Tran wrote:

I would be nice to add this into karaf dev doc

-D


On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 10:58 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote:

Hi Krzysztof,

you can find the code formatter for Eclipse here:

http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/__servicemix/smx3/branches/__servicemix-3.2/build/src/main/__resources/smx-eclipse-code-__conventions.xml?view=co&__revision=602828&content-type=__text%2Fplain
<http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/servicemix/smx3/branches/servicemix-3.2/build/src/main/resources/smx-eclipse-code-conventions.xml?view=co&revision=602828&content-type=text%2Fplain>

Regards
JB


On 01/15/2014 08:52 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:

Hi

Do you have any special code formatting configuration for
Eclipse used
when you develop Karaf, SMX or Camel?

Regards
Krzysztof


--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org <mailto:jbono...@apache.org>
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com







--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: [DISCUSS] Upgrade ServiceMix to Karaf 2.3.5

2014-04-11 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak


Hi

I have performed a quick build of ServiceMix with Karaf 2.3.5 from the 
staging repository. It looks ok


 * build successful
 * testcases successful
 * quick test of the assembly seccessful

In the final upgrade we should check whether we should upgrade any other 
dependencies.


I think, the staged Karaf release is ok.

Best regards
Krzysztof


On 11.04.2014 12:54, Jamie G. wrote:

Picking up Karaf 2.3.5 is a good idea - it's mostly bug fixes and
dependency updates (which also contain more bug fixes). By the way,
Karaf 2.3.5 RC1 is up for vote
http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Apache-Karaf-2-3-5-tt4032691.html
- please take a moment, review, and post your vote to the above thread
so we can make it available to the community as soon as possible  :)

--Jamie

On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Gert Vanthienen
 wrote:

Hi Krzysztof,


Yeah, the main reason we have these branches for doing micro version
releases of ServiceMix is to be able to pick up these fix/micro
versions of our dependencies.  We can always pick up some bug fixes of
our own as well, off course ;)  So I'm definitely +1 for an upgrade to
2.3.5 on the 5.0.x branch once it is available.

Also, once Karaf 2.3.5 is out, perhaps we should consider doing a
5.1.0 release - I think we have a pull request ready for the upgrade
to Camel 2.13.0 as well, so that way we can get our users going on the
new Camel release.  Wdyt?


Regards,

Gert Vanthienen


On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Sobkowiak, Krzysztof
 wrote:

Hi

Karaf 2.3.5 will be released soon. We should upgrade the ServiceMix 5.1.x to
the new version. Sould be 5.0.x upgraded too? 5.0.x is a maintenance branch
and only fixes should be committed here. But Karaf 2.3.5 has also only fixes
for 2.3.4. I think, the upgrade should make no problems.

Best regards
Krzysztof


--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center |
Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak



--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Github sync

2014-04-11 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak


Hi

I think, something is wrong again with the sync with github.

Best regards
Krzysztof


--
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center 
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> | 
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Problem with calling WebService from serviceTask

2014-04-24 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

activiti.engine.impl.persistence.entity.ExecutionEntity.start(ExecutionEntity.java:335)at
> org.activiti.engine.impl.cmd.StartProcessInstanceCmd.execute(StartProcessInstanceCmd.java:72)at
> org.activiti.engine.impl.cmd.StartProcessInstanceCmd.execute(StartProcessInstanceCmd.java:31)at
> org.activiti.engine.impl.interceptor.CommandExecutorImpl.execute(CommandExecutorImpl.java:24)at
> org.activiti.engine.impl.interceptor.CommandContextInterceptor.execute(CommandContextInterceptor.java:42)at
> org.activiti.engine.impl.interceptor.JtaTransactionInterceptor.execute(JtaTransactionInterceptor.java:59)at
> org.activiti.engine.impl.interceptor.LogInterceptor.execute(LogInterceptor.java:33)at
> org.activiti.engine.impl.RuntimeServiceImpl.startProcessInstanceByKey(RuntimeServiceImpl.java:55)at
> Proxyf138e743_9da0_45a4_be4e_6b2c8e65cd48.startProcessInstanceByKey(Unknown
> Source)at
> org.activiti.camel.ActivitiProducer.startProcess(ActivitiProducer.java:93)at
> org.activiti.camel.ActivitiProducer.process(ActivitiProducer.java:48)at
> org.apache.camel.util.AsyncProcessorConverterHelper$ProcessorToAsyncProcessorBridge.process(AsyncProcessorConverterHelper.java:61)...
> 32 moreCaused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
> javax.xml.namespace.QNameat
> java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:366)at
> java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:355)at
> java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)at
> java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:354)at
> java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:423)at
> java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:356)... 137 more*What
> should I do to make it run?*
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: 
> http://servicemix.396122.n5.nabble.com/Problem-with-calling-WebService-from-serviceTask-tp5720072.html
> Sent from the ServiceMix - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: How about a 5.0.1 and 5.1.0 release?

2014-04-30 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

Hi Gert

Could you tell me what happens when you try to install the Camel Drools
example? I was not able to install it some days ago when eventadmin was
installed. Today I can not reproduce this problem with Camel Drools (but
it still exists with Activiti)

Best regards
Krzysztof

On 30.04.2014 11:31, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
> One of the main things
> remaining there appears to be the problem with the Camel Drools
> example - that example not only causes the itests to fail
> intermittently, it looks like we also have a problem when installing
> the example in the actual container.
>

-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Pull requests

2014-05-06 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

Hi

Is there any Apache "political correct" way to apply pull requests?

Best regards
Krzysztof

-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

[DISCUSS] Drop support for JDK 1.5 in ServiceMix 6

2014-05-06 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

Hi

Karaf 3 drops support for JDK 1.5 (KARAF-328
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-328>). What do you think
about dropping the support for JDK 1.5 in ServiceMix 6 too?

Best regards
Krzysztof


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: [DISCUSS] Drop support for JDK 1.5 in ServiceMix 6

2014-05-06 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

We must also change the source and target version in maven-compiler-plugin


On 06.05.2014 22:46, Cristiano Costantini wrote:
> Isn't implicitly dropped as soon as we start using Karaf 3.0.0?
>
> Anyhow yes for dropping 1.6 from me.
>
>
> 2014-05-06 20:53 GMT+02:00 Krzysztof Sobkowiak :
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Karaf 3 drops support for JDK 1.5 (KARAF-328
>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-328>). What do you think
>> about dropping the support for JDK 1.5 in ServiceMix 6 too?
>>
>> Best regards
>> Krzysztof
>>
>>
>> --
>> Krzysztof Sobkowiak
>>
>> JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
>> Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
>> <http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
>> e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
>> Twitter: @KSobkowiak
>>


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Problem with committing into the documentation svn repository

2014-05-11 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

Hi

I'm trying to commit something into the ServiceMix documentation. I'm
getting following error

svn: E175013: Commit failed (details follow):
svn: E175013: Access to '/repos/asf/!svn/me' forbidden
svn: E175013: Your commit message was left in a temporary file:
svn: E175013:'/home/kso/work/projects/asf/documentation/svn-commit.tmp

Am I missing rights for this repository?

Best regards
Krzysztof


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Problem with committing into the documentation svn repository

It was my mistake. I have forgotten s in https

Best regards
Krzysztof

On 08.05.2014 22:18, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'm trying to commit something into the ServiceMix documentation. I'm
> getting following error
>
> svn: E175013: Commit failed (details follow):
> svn: E175013: Access to '/repos/asf/!svn/me' forbidden
> svn: E175013: Your commit message was left in a temporary file:
> svn: E175013:'/home/kso/work/projects/asf/documentation/svn-commit.tmp
>
> Am I missing rights for this repository?


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: Build 5.0.1 release tomorrow?

Sorry I have mixed borh versions. 5.0.x has no problem with the itest. But
we should create the separate drools feature
On May 13, 2014 3:48 PM, "Krzysztof Sobkowiak" 
wrote:

> +1
>
> We should add karaf user as workaround for activemq console and apply your
> proposal for the camel drools itest problem.
>
> I'm back on thursday.
>
> Best regards
> Krzysztof
> On May 13, 2014 1:42 PM, "Gert Vanthienen" 
> wrote:
>
>> L.S.,
>>
>>
>> I deferred most of the remaining issues to 5.0.2 - we probably want to
>> apply the pull request for separating the drools feature (SM-2288) and
>> figure out how we want to handle the problem with the ActiveMQ web
>> console (SM-2267), but other than that we are ready to do a 5.0.1
>> release in my mind.
>>
>> Unless someone has anything else that desperately needs to make it in,
>> how about we try to tick off those final 2 little items today and I'll
>> cut the release tomorrow?
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Gert Vanthienen
>>
>

Re: Build 5.0.1 release tomorrow?

+1

We should add karaf user as workaround for activemq console and apply your
proposal for the camel drools itest problem.

I'm back on thursday.

Best regards
Krzysztof
On May 13, 2014 1:42 PM, "Gert Vanthienen" 
wrote:

> L.S.,
>
>
> I deferred most of the remaining issues to 5.0.2 - we probably want to
> apply the pull request for separating the drools feature (SM-2288) and
> figure out how we want to handle the problem with the ActiveMQ web
> console (SM-2267), but other than that we are ready to do a 5.0.1
> release in my mind.
>
> Unless someone has anything else that desperately needs to make it in,
> how about we try to tick off those final 2 little items today and I'll
> cut the release tomorrow?
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert Vanthienen
>

JIRA and git notifications problem

Hi

Since yesterday some Jira and commit notification emails are not sent to
dev/commits mailing lists.

Regards
Krzysztof

-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: [DISCUSS] Drop support for JDK 1.5 in ServiceMix 6

2014-05-15 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

Yes, of course JDK 1.5 is no more supported by Karaf 3 and other
dependencies, but ServiceMix code still uses the source/target 1.5. I'm
going to change it to 1.6 in ServiceMix 6. 

On 07.05.2014 03:18, Daniel Kulp wrote:
> Isn’t ServiceMix using Camel 2.11+ and CXF 2.7.x?  JDK 1.5 is already  kind 
> of not supported.
>
> Dan
>
>
> On May 6, 2014, at 2:53 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak  
> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Karaf 3 drops support for JDK 1.5 (KARAF-328
>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-328>). What do you think
>> about dropping the support for JDK 1.5 in ServiceMix 6 too?
>>
>> Best regards
>> Krzysztof
>>
>>


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ServiceMix 5.0.1

2014-05-15 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

+1

I have performed some tests. It looks good

Best regards
Krzysztof

On 14.05.2014 21:25, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
> L.S.,
>
>
> This is a vote to release Apache ServiceMix 5.0.1
>
> The staging area is available at
>   https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheservicemix-1008
>
> An overview of issues fixed in this release can be found in JIRA at
>   https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM/fixforversion/12326511/
>
> The scm tag is available on
>   
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/?p=servicemix.git;a=tag;h=59a8eaf7c0e52160254636b10ad8858835022681
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
>
> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> [ ] -1 Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
>
> This vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert Vanthienen


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak

Re: [PROPOSAL] Java8 support for SMX 6.1

2014-05-22 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

Hi Jean-Baptiste

Welcome back :) I think, it's a goo idea with Java 8.

Best regards
Krzysztof

On 22.05.2014 19:53, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> As you may know, I started to add the support of Java8 in all projects
> related to Karaf (ops4j/pax, aries, etc) and Karaf itself (for 3.0.2).
> Dan said that CXF should support Java8 in CXF 3.1.x.
> ActiveMQ and Camel should be pretty good (I'm testing right now).
>
> I started to work on Java8 support in ServiceMix and start refactoring
> of some modules no more needed with Karaf 3.x (especially naming can
> be replaced by jndi Karaf features).
>
> WDYT ?
>
> I haven't been very active in the past weeks on ServiceMix (I'm very
> sorry about that but I got a bunch of customer engagements), but as
> you can see, I'm back in the business \o/ ;)
>
> Regards
> JB


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

ServiceMix 5.1.0

2014-05-24 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

Hi

What do you think about releasing ServiceMix 5.1.0 soon?

Best regards
Krzysztof



-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: ServiceMix 5.1.0

2014-05-24 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

I'm going to apply the Wims pull request with the archetypes this
weekend. I think, we have nothing blocking. Next week I'll have less
cycles for ServiceMix due to some trainings. I'll try to perform some tests.

Best regards
Krzysztof

On 24.05.2014 22:21, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
>
> Yeah, I think that would make a lot of sense.  I had hoped to be able
> to review the outstanding issues yesterday, but other things got in
> the way.  If things look good to go, I should be able to find some
> time on Monday or Tuesday to cut the actual release, but if someone
> else wants to have a go at that, feel free...
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert Vanthienen
>
>
> On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 8:53 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
>  wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> What do you think about releasing ServiceMix 5.1.0 soon?
>>
>> Best regards
>> Krzysztof
>>
>>

-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: ServiceMix 5.1.0

2014-05-24 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

I think, we should check SM-2285
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2285>.

On 24.05.2014 22:57, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:
> I'm going to apply the Wims pull request with the archetypes this
> weekend. I think, we have nothing blocking. Next week I'll have less
> cycles for ServiceMix due to some trainings. I'll try to perform some
> tests.
>
> Best regards
> Krzysztof
>
> On 24.05.2014 22:21, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>> Hi Krzysztof,
>>
>> Yeah, I think that would make a lot of sense.  I had hoped to be able
>> to review the outstanding issues yesterday, but other things got in
>> the way.  If things look good to go, I should be able to find some
>> time on Monday or Tuesday to cut the actual release, but if someone
>> else wants to have a go at that, feel free...
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Gert Vanthienen
>>
>>
>> On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 8:53 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
>>  wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> What do you think about releasing ServiceMix 5.1.0 soon?
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Krzysztof
>>>
>>>

Re: Doc branches for 5.x and 6.x

Hi Gert

I think, we should have a branch for a major release (4.x, 5,x, 6.x). If
there are any minor differences between minor versions (e.g. 5.0.x and
5.1.x) we can document the difference it in the documentation.

Best regards
Krzysztof

On 28.05.2014 10:01, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
> L.S.,
>
>
> Up to now, we have always had documentation branches per minor version
> of ServiceMix, e.g. we have http://servicemix.apache.org/docs/4.4.x/
> and http://servicemix.apache.org/docs/4.5.x/
>
> While preparing for the ServiceMix 5.1.x release, I was wondering if
> we couldn't trim down the number of branches we need to maintain and
> just publish a single http://servicemix.apache.org/docs/5.x/ doc base
> instead?  There shouldn't be that many changes between the various 5.x
> versions that we need different sets of docs for them.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert Vanthienen


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

drools examples not promoted in central for ServiceMix 5.0.[0,1]

Hi

I wanted to install the drools example on ServiceMix 5.0.1 and I'm
getting following error

karaf@root> features:install examples-camel-drools
Error executing command: URL
[mvn:org.apache.servicemix.examples/camel-drools/5.0.1] could not be
resolved.
karaf@root> features:install examples-camel-drools-blueprint
Error executing command: URL
[mvn:org.apache.servicemix.examples/camel-drools-blueprint/5.0.1] could
not be resolved.
 
The artifacts for the both examples are missing in central repository

http://central.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/servicemix/examples/camel-drools/
http://central.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/servicemix/examples/camel-drools-blueprint/


Best regards
Krzysztof



-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: drools examples not promoted in central for ServiceMix 5.0.[0,1]

The samples were included in the staging repositories for the both
version. I have tested them before ServiceMix 5.0.0 and 5.0.1 were
promoted to central. Something was wrong while or after promoting.

On 28.05.2014 14:57, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:
> Hi
>
> I wanted to install the drools example on ServiceMix 5.0.1 and I'm
> getting following error
>
> karaf@root> features:install examples-camel-drools
> Error executing command: URL
> [mvn:org.apache.servicemix.examples/camel-drools/5.0.1] could not be
> resolved.
> karaf@root> features:install examples-camel-drools-blueprint
> Error executing command: URL
> [mvn:org.apache.servicemix.examples/camel-drools-blueprint/5.0.1]
> could not be resolved.
>  
> The artifacts for the both examples are missing in central repository
>
> http://central.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/servicemix/examples/camel-drools/
> http://central.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/servicemix/examples/camel-drools-blueprint/
>
>
> Best regards
> Krzysztof


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ServiceMix 5.1.0

Hi

I have found some minor issues testing 5.1.0, but the issues exist also
in the previous releases. We haven't detected them before. I have opened
some JIRAs. I think the issues should not block the current release.
I'll test further tomorrow.

Best regards
Krzysztof

On 28.05.2014 14:29, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
> L.S.,
>
>
> This is a vote to release Apache ServiceMix 5.1.0.
>
> The staging area is available at
>   https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheservicemix-1009/
>
> An overview of issues fixed in this release can be found in JIRA at
>   https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM/fixforversion/12326660
>
> The scm tag is available on
>   
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/?p=servicemix.git;a=commit;h=8504e67e8eaffca62aae15936daa85c5e82e53a5
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
>
> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> [ ] -1 Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
>
> This vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert Vanthienen


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ServiceMix 5.1.0

2014-05-30 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

Hi

On 30.05.2014 15:10, Gregor Zurowski wrote:
> Hi Everyone:
>
> I have found similar issues related to ActiveMQ as previously reported
> by Krzysztof and Jean-Baptiste: Custom bundles using ActiveMQ did not
> reflect the correct status after deployment, and the broker did not
> get started with another test installation.
We need more complex samples to perform the tests. The ActiveMQ sample
causes no problems with 5.9.1.  The ActiveMQ quick start works too after
installation on ServiceMix, but fails after ServiceMix restart (this is
my mistake, I haven't tested quick start & restart it before the commit)

>
> I had further problems with a custom bundle originally developed for
> 5.0.0 because the org.apache.commons.lang bundle is not available by
> default any longer. Further looking into it, I realized that this
> seems to be the case since 5.0.1. Is that an intended change or an
> actual defect?
I have just started fresh 5.0.1 and Commons Lang is available after startup

karaf@root> list -t 0 | grep Common
[  44] [Active ] [Created ] [   ] [   30] Apache Karaf ::
Diagnostic :: Common (2.3.5)
[  87] [Active ] [] [   ] [   50] Commons Pool (1.6.0)
[  90] [Active ] [] [   ] [   50] Commons Net (3.3.0)
[ 153] [Active ] [] [   ] [   40] Commons Lang (2.6)

This is installed probably by one of the CXF features.

Best regards
Krzysztof


> Thanks,
> Gregor
>
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Gert Vanthienen
>  wrote:
>> L.S.,
>>
>>
>> This is a vote to release Apache ServiceMix 5.1.0.
>>
>> The staging area is available at
>>   
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheservicemix-1009/
>>
>> An overview of issues fixed in this release can be found in JIRA at
>>   https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM/fixforversion/12326660
>>
>> The scm tag is available on
>>   
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/?p=servicemix.git;a=commit;h=8504e67e8eaffca62aae15936daa85c5e82e53a5
>>
>> Please vote to approve this release:
>>
>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
>> [ ] -1 Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
>>
>> This vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Gert Vanthienen


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ServiceMix 5.1.0

2014-05-30 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

I have tested this problem wit AMQ 5.9.0 and 5.9.1 on Karaf 2.3.4 and
2.3.5. On 2.3.4 it works, on 2.3.5 start of the routes fails after Karaf
restart. It seems to be a problem with Karaf upgrade.

Best regards
Krzysztof

On 30.05.2014 16:51, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
> L.S.,
>
> I took a quick look at the issue with the ActiveMQ connection factory
> that is keeping the quickstart example in "Creating" - on my machine,
> I also have the same issue with Apache ServiceMix 5.0.1 (which is
> still using ActiveMQ 5.9.0).  Looking at the output from jstack, it
> looks like the changes for
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-2760 might have something
> to do with it - when the properties LoginModule is being initialized
> as part of the ActiveMQ connection being set up, it wants to register
> something in the OSGi Service Registry and seems unable to acquire the
> necessary locks to do that.
>
> For commons-lang: that seems to be caused by a change in the camel-cxf
> feature definition.  In earlier versions, that was installing the
> cxf-xjc-runtime feature which included the commons-lang bundle.  With
> the new versions, a smaller set of CXF features is being installed as
> part of the camel-cxf feature, causing the commons-lang to no longer
> be installed out-of-the-box.  So that seems to be an intended change
> in the Camel features.xml file.  Since none of the remaining boot
> features require commons-lang, I don't think there's a real need for
> it to be installed by default.
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert Vanthienen
>
>
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Gregor Zurowski  wrote:
>> Hi Everyone:
>>
>> I have found similar issues related to ActiveMQ as previously reported
>> by Krzysztof and Jean-Baptiste: Custom bundles using ActiveMQ did not
>> reflect the correct status after deployment, and the broker did not
>> get started with another test installation.
>>
>> I had further problems with a custom bundle originally developed for
>> 5.0.0 because the org.apache.commons.lang bundle is not available by
>> default any longer. Further looking into it, I realized that this
>> seems to be the case since 5.0.1. Is that an intended change or an
>> actual defect?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Gregor
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Gert Vanthienen
>>  wrote:
>>> L.S.,
>>>
>>>
>>> This is a vote to release Apache ServiceMix 5.1.0.
>>>
>>> The staging area is available at
>>>   
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheservicemix-1009/
>>>
>>> An overview of issues fixed in this release can be found in JIRA at
>>>   https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM/fixforversion/12326660
>>>
>>> The scm tag is available on
>>>   
>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/?p=servicemix.git;a=commit;h=8504e67e8eaffca62aae15936daa85c5e82e53a5
>>>
>>> Please vote to approve this release:
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
>>> [ ] -1 Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
>>>
>>> This vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Gert Vanthienen


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ServiceMix 5.1.0

2014-05-30 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

Hi

I don't know if it helps, but I have tested the same problem on Karaf
snapshots (4.0.0-SNAPSHOT, 3.0.2-SNAPSHOT, 2.3.6-SNAPSHOT) and the
problem seems to be fixed. Has fix for issue
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-2910 fixed the problem (if
it's really caused by issue mentioned by Gert)?

Of course, we are still on 2.3.5 and 3.0.1.

Best regards
Krzysztof 

On 30.05.2014 18:05, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> It's for me ;)
>
> Let me take a look on that and especially the default config in
> etc/org.apache.karaf.features.cfg: I introduced a config to control of
> the feature (sync or async), it could be related (or the start level
> support). However, the default behavior should be the same.
>
> Let me take a look on that.
>
> I keep you posted.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 05/30/2014 06:02 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:
>> I have tested this problem wit AMQ 5.9.0 and 5.9.1 on Karaf 2.3.4 and
>> 2.3.5. On 2.3.4 it works, on 2.3.5 start of the routes fails after Karaf
>> restart. It seems to be a problem with Karaf upgrade.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Krzysztof
>>
>> On 30.05.2014 16:51, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>>> L.S.,
>>>
>>> I took a quick look at the issue with the ActiveMQ connection factory
>>> that is keeping the quickstart example in "Creating" - on my machine,
>>> I also have the same issue with Apache ServiceMix 5.0.1 (which is
>>> still using ActiveMQ 5.9.0).  Looking at the output from jstack, it
>>> looks like the changes for
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-2760 might have something
>>> to do with it - when the properties LoginModule is being initialized
>>> as part of the ActiveMQ connection being set up, it wants to register
>>> something in the OSGi Service Registry and seems unable to acquire the
>>> necessary locks to do that.
>>>
>>> For commons-lang: that seems to be caused by a change in the camel-cxf
>>> feature definition.  In earlier versions, that was installing the
>>> cxf-xjc-runtime feature which included the commons-lang bundle.  With
>>> the new versions, a smaller set of CXF features is being installed as
>>> part of the camel-cxf feature, causing the commons-lang to no longer
>>> be installed out-of-the-box.  So that seems to be an intended change
>>> in the Camel features.xml file.  Since none of the remaining boot
>>> features require commons-lang, I don't think there's a real need for
>>> it to be installed by default.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Gert Vanthienen
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Gregor Zurowski
>>>  wrote:
>>>> Hi Everyone:
>>>>
>>>> I have found similar issues related to ActiveMQ as previously reported
>>>> by Krzysztof and Jean-Baptiste: Custom bundles using ActiveMQ did not
>>>> reflect the correct status after deployment, and the broker did not
>>>> get started with another test installation.
>>>>
>>>> I had further problems with a custom bundle originally developed for
>>>> 5.0.0 because the org.apache.commons.lang bundle is not available by
>>>> default any longer. Further looking into it, I realized that this
>>>> seems to be the case since 5.0.1. Is that an intended change or an
>>>> actual defect?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Gregor
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Gert Vanthienen
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>> L.S.,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This is a vote to release Apache ServiceMix 5.1.0.
>>>>>
>>>>> The staging area is available at
>>>>>   
>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheservicemix-1009/
>>>>>
>>>>> An overview of issues fixed in this release can be found in JIRA at
>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM/fixforversion/12326660
>>>>>
>>>>> The scm tag is available on
>>>>>   
>>>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/?p=servicemix.git;a=commit;h=8504e67e8eaffca62aae15936daa85c5e82e53a5
>>>>>
>>>>> Please vote to approve this release:
>>>>>
>>>>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
>>>>>
>>>>> This vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Gert Vanthienen
>>
>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ServiceMix 5.1.0

2014-06-01 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

+1 for reverting to 5.0.0 (as 5.0.1 is not usable) and releasing 5.0.2
based om Karaf 2.3.6
+1 to releasing 5.1.0 with Karaf 2.3.6
Perhaps could we change now the code base to Karaf 2.3.6-SNAPSHOT to
have more time for tests.


Best regards
Krzysztof

On 31.05.2014 11:40, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
> L.S.,
>
> Looking at the changes for that issue, that change would definitely
> avoid the issue I was seeing on my machine.  I'll ping the Karaf dev@
> list to see if we can get a new 2.3.6 release out soon enough for us
> to work with.  If that would take too long, I think I would prefer
> doing a 5.1.0 with an older version of Karaf, but providing the 2.13.1
> version of Camel to our users instead of waiting around - we can
> always do a 5.1.1 afterwards when Karaf 2.3.6 is out.
>
> In the meanwhile, I'm wondering if we shouldn't revert to promoting
> 5.0.0 on our main website/downloads or at least add a "known issues"
> section to the release notes about the possible ActiveMQ issue?
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert
>
>
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:01 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
>  wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> I don't know if it helps, but I have tested the same problem on Karaf
>> snapshots (4.0.0-SNAPSHOT, 3.0.2-SNAPSHOT, 2.3.6-SNAPSHOT) and the
>> problem seems to be fixed. Has fix for issue
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-2910 fixed the problem (if
>> it's really caused by issue mentioned by Gert)?
>>
>> Of course, we are still on 2.3.5 and 3.0.1.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Krzysztof
>>
>> On 30.05.2014 18:05, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>>> It's for me ;)
>>>
>>> Let me take a look on that and especially the default config in
>>> etc/org.apache.karaf.features.cfg: I introduced a config to control of
>>> the feature (sync or async), it could be related (or the start level
>>> support). However, the default behavior should be the same.
>>>
>>> Let me take a look on that.
>>>
>>> I keep you posted.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> On 05/30/2014 06:02 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:
>>>> I have tested this problem wit AMQ 5.9.0 and 5.9.1 on Karaf 2.3.4 and
>>>> 2.3.5. On 2.3.4 it works, on 2.3.5 start of the routes fails after Karaf
>>>> restart. It seems to be a problem with Karaf upgrade.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>
>>>> On 30.05.2014 16:51, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>>>>> L.S.,
>>>>>
>>>>> I took a quick look at the issue with the ActiveMQ connection factory
>>>>> that is keeping the quickstart example in "Creating" - on my machine,
>>>>> I also have the same issue with Apache ServiceMix 5.0.1 (which is
>>>>> still using ActiveMQ 5.9.0).  Looking at the output from jstack, it
>>>>> looks like the changes for
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-2760 might have something
>>>>> to do with it - when the properties LoginModule is being initialized
>>>>> as part of the ActiveMQ connection being set up, it wants to register
>>>>> something in the OSGi Service Registry and seems unable to acquire the
>>>>> necessary locks to do that.
>>>>>
>>>>> For commons-lang: that seems to be caused by a change in the camel-cxf
>>>>> feature definition.  In earlier versions, that was installing the
>>>>> cxf-xjc-runtime feature which included the commons-lang bundle.  With
>>>>> the new versions, a smaller set of CXF features is being installed as
>>>>> part of the camel-cxf feature, causing the commons-lang to no longer
>>>>> be installed out-of-the-box.  So that seems to be an intended change
>>>>> in the Camel features.xml file.  Since none of the remaining boot
>>>>> features require commons-lang, I don't think there's a real need for
>>>>> it to be installed by default.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Gert Vanthienen
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Gregor Zurowski
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Everyone:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have found similar issues related to ActiveMQ as previously reported
>>>>>> by Krzysztof and Jean-Baptiste: Custom bundles using ActiveMQ did not
>>>>>> reflect the correct status after deployment, and the broker did not
&

Re: [VOTE] Apache ServiceMix Bundles 2014.05 release

2014-06-05 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak


+1

On 04.06.2014 21:36, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I submit the ServiceMix Bundles 2014.05 release to your vote.
>
> Release Notes:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12311208&version=12326710
>
>
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheservicemix-1010/
>
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
>
> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> [ ] -1 Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
>
> This vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
> Thanks,
> Regards
> JB


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Route deployed in deploy directory using activemq does not start after ServiceMix restart (was: [VOTE] Release Apache ServiceMix 5.1.0)

2014-06-05 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

Hi

I have bad news. I have just tested the problem again using the new
2.3.6-SNAPSHOT and the problems still exists (but after more, 3-4,
restarts). I have reverted the changes for KARAF-2760 and built Karaf.
It solved the problem. It means, KARAF-2760 causes the problem. But it
seems KARAF-2910 causes the problem does not exist after first restart.
But after more restarts the problem exists again.

Best regards
Krzysztof   

On 01.06.2014 19:16, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> I agree, but please, give a couple of days to update and integrate
> some fixes in 2.3.6-SNAPSHOT. I will tackle the update in ServiceMix
> myself if you don't mind.
>
> Thanks,
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 06/01/2014 07:05 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:
>> +1 for reverting to 5.0.0 (as 5.0.1 is not usable) and releasing 5.0.2
>> based om Karaf 2.3.6
>> +1 to releasing 5.1.0 with Karaf 2.3.6
>> Perhaps could we change now the code base to Karaf 2.3.6-SNAPSHOT to
>> have more time for tests.
>>
>>
>> Best regards
>> Krzysztof
>>
>> On 31.05.2014 11:40, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>>> L.S.,
>>>
>>> Looking at the changes for that issue, that change would definitely
>>> avoid the issue I was seeing on my machine.  I'll ping the Karaf dev@
>>> list to see if we can get a new 2.3.6 release out soon enough for us
>>> to work with.  If that would take too long, I think I would prefer
>>> doing a 5.1.0 with an older version of Karaf, but providing the 2.13.1
>>> version of Camel to our users instead of waiting around - we can
>>> always do a 5.1.1 afterwards when Karaf 2.3.6 is out.
>>>
>>> In the meanwhile, I'm wondering if we shouldn't revert to promoting
>>> 5.0.0 on our main website/downloads or at least add a "known issues"
>>> section to the release notes about the possible ActiveMQ issue?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Gert
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 10:01 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
>>>  wrote:
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> I don't know if it helps, but I have tested the same problem on Karaf
>>>> snapshots (4.0.0-SNAPSHOT, 3.0.2-SNAPSHOT, 2.3.6-SNAPSHOT) and the
>>>> problem seems to be fixed. Has fix for issue
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-2910 fixed the problem (if
>>>> it's really caused by issue mentioned by Gert)?
>>>>
>>>> Of course, we are still on 2.3.5 and 3.0.1.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>
>>>> On 30.05.2014 18:05, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>>>>> It's for me ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> Let me take a look on that and especially the default config in
>>>>> etc/org.apache.karaf.features.cfg: I introduced a config to
>>>>> control of
>>>>> the feature (sync or async), it could be related (or the start level
>>>>> support). However, the default behavior should be the same.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let me take a look on that.
>>>>>
>>>>> I keep you posted.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> JB
>>>>>
>>>>> On 05/30/2014 06:02 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:
>>>>>> I have tested this problem wit AMQ 5.9.0 and 5.9.1 on Karaf 2.3.4
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> 2.3.5. On 2.3.4 it works, on 2.3.5 start of the routes fails
>>>>>> after Karaf
>>>>>> restart. It seems to be a problem with Karaf upgrade.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards
>>>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 30.05.2014 16:51, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>>>>>>> L.S.,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I took a quick look at the issue with the ActiveMQ connection
>>>>>>> factory
>>>>>>> that is keeping the quickstart example in "Creating" - on my
>>>>>>> machine,
>>>>>>> I also have the same issue with Apache ServiceMix 5.0.1 (which is
>>>>>>> still using ActiveMQ 5.9.0).  Looking at the output from jstack, it
>>>>>>> looks like the changes for
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-2760 might have
>>>>>>> something
>>>>>>> to do with it - when the properties LoginModule is being
>>>>>>> initialized
>>>>>>> as part of the Act

Re: [jira] [Created] (SM-2328) Upgrade to ActiveMQ 5.10.0

2014-06-12 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

Hi

I have pushed in my Github repo a new branch
(https://github.com/sobkowiak/servicemix/tree/ActiveMQ-5.10.0)
containing following changes

  * downgrade Karaf to 2.3.4 (to avoid the issue introduced with 2.3.5)
  * upgraded ActiveMQ to 2.10.0
  * remove the ActiveMQ web console workaround (SM-2303
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2303>)

Please feel free to checkout this branch and test. We can find eventual
new issues introduced with 2.10.0.

Best regards
Krzysztof


On 12.06.2014 11:30, Benjamin Graf (JIRA) wrote:
> Benjamin Graf created SM-2328:
> -
>
>  Summary: Upgrade to ActiveMQ 5.10.0
>  Key: SM-2328
>  URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2328
>  Project: ServiceMix
>   Issue Type: Task
>   Components: assemblies
> Reporter: Benjamin Graf
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
> (v6.2#6252)


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: [jira] [Created] (SM-2328) Upgrade to ActiveMQ 5.10.0

I'll push it in the evening.


On 13.06.2014 13:12, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof
>
> I just tested and it looks better, thanks.
>
> +1 to commit/push.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 06/12/2014 09:33 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> I have pushed in my Github repo a new branch
>> (https://github.com/sobkowiak/servicemix/tree/ActiveMQ-5.10.0)
>> containing following changes
>>
>>* downgrade Karaf to 2.3.4 (to avoid the issue introduced with 2.3.5)
>>* upgraded ActiveMQ to 2.10.0
>>* remove the ActiveMQ web console workaround (SM-2303
>>  <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2303>)
>>
>> Please feel free to checkout this branch and test. We can find eventual
>> new issues introduced with 2.10.0.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Krzysztof
>>
>>
>> On 12.06.2014 11:30, Benjamin Graf (JIRA) wrote:
>>> Benjamin Graf created SM-2328:
>>> -
>>>
>>>   Summary: Upgrade to ActiveMQ 5.10.0
>>>   Key: SM-2328
>>>   URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2328
>>>   Project: ServiceMix
>>>    Issue Type: Task
>>>Components: assemblies
>>>  Reporter: Benjamin Graf
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
>>> (v6.2#6252)
>>
>>
>


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: [jira] [Created] (SM-2328) Upgrade to ActiveMQ 5.10.0

Hi Gert

Are we going to upgrade 5.0.x to ActiveMQ 5.10.0 too? Or the only change
should be downgrade to Karaf 2.3.4?

Best regards
Krzysztof

On 13.06.2014 13:07, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
> L.S.,
>
>
> I have been testing with the changes on Krzysztof's branch and things
> do look a lot better there.  How about we just commit those to the
> servicemix-5.1.x branch, that makes it a bit easier for people to test
> and play with them. If things look OK to everyone, we could do a new
> 5.1.0 release with the older version of Karaf and the ActiveMQ upgrade
> to 5.10.0 on Monday?  Similarly, I think I would do the same changes
> on the servicemix-5.0.x branch and do a 5.0.2 release there as well.
> Wdyt?
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert Vanthienen
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Sobkowiak, Krzysztof
>  wrote:
>> Yes :-)
>>
>> On 13.06.2014 01:29, Raul Kripalani wrote:
>>> 2.10.0? You mean 5.10.0, right?
>>>
>>> Raúl.
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>>> On 12 Jun 2014, at 20:33, Krzysztof Sobkowiak  
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> I have pushed in my Github repo a new branch
>>>> (https://github.com/sobkowiak/servicemix/tree/ActiveMQ-5.10.0)
>>>> containing following changes
>>>>
>>>>  * downgrade Karaf to 2.3.4 (to avoid the issue introduced with 2.3.5)
>>>>  * upgraded ActiveMQ to 2.10.0
>>>>  * remove the ActiveMQ web console workaround (SM-2303
>>>><https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2303>)
>>>>
>>>> Please feel free to checkout this branch and test. We can find eventual
>>>> new issues introduced with 2.10.0.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 12.06.2014 11:30, Benjamin Graf (JIRA) wrote:
>>>>> Benjamin Graf created SM-2328:
>>>>> -
>>>>>
>>>>> Summary: Upgrade to ActiveMQ 5.10.0
>>>>> Key: SM-2328
>>>>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2328
>>>>> Project: ServiceMix
>>>>>  Issue Type: Task
>>>>>  Components: assemblies
>>>>>Reporter: Benjamin Graf
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
>>>>> (v6.2#6252)
>>>> --
>>>> Krzysztof Sobkowiak
>>>>
>>>> JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
>>>> Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
>>>> <http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
>>>> e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
>>>> Twitter: @KSobkowiak
>>>> Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC
>> --
>> Krzysztof Sobkowiak
>>
>> JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
>> Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
>> <http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
>> e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
>> Twitter: @KSobkowiak
>> Calendar: http://goo.gl/yvsebC


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: [jira] [Created] (SM-2328) Upgrade to ActiveMQ 5.10.0

The problem occurs in master too. We could upgrade to ActiveMQ 5.10.0
(as it seem not to introduce new problems) and wait for next Karaf
version fixing the deploy issue. I haven't tested it with Karaf 3.0.0,
but I think we can simple wait for new Karaf as we can release 6.0.0 later.

On 13.06.2014 13:12, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof
>
> I just tested and it looks better, thanks.
>
> +1 to commit/push.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 06/12/2014 09:33 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> I have pushed in my Github repo a new branch
>> (https://github.com/sobkowiak/servicemix/tree/ActiveMQ-5.10.0)
>> containing following changes
>>
>>* downgrade Karaf to 2.3.4 (to avoid the issue introduced with 2.3.5)
>>* upgraded ActiveMQ to 2.10.0
>>* remove the ActiveMQ web console workaround (SM-2303
>>  <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2303>)
>>
>> Please feel free to checkout this branch and test. We can find eventual
>> new issues introduced with 2.10.0.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Krzysztof
>>
>>
>> On 12.06.2014 11:30, Benjamin Graf (JIRA) wrote:
>>> Benjamin Graf created SM-2328:
>>> -
>>>
>>>   Summary: Upgrade to ActiveMQ 5.10.0
>>>   Key: SM-2328
>>>   URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2328
>>>   Project: ServiceMix
>>>    Issue Type: Task
>>>Components: assemblies
>>>  Reporter: Benjamin Graf
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
>>> (v6.2#6252)
>>
>>
>


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: [jira] [Created] (SM-2328) Upgrade to ActiveMQ 5.10.0

If you have already everything on your drive and you manage to do it
with some commands and you have time  you can simply do this :-) . I'll
have access to my notebook in the evening.

On 13.06.2014 13:41, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Do you want that I do it ?
>
> Let me know what you prefer.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 06/13/2014 01:38 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:
>> I'll push it in the evening.
>>
>>
>> On 13.06.2014 13:12, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>>> Hi Krzysztof
>>>
>>> I just tested and it looks better, thanks.
>>>
>>> +1 to commit/push.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> On 06/12/2014 09:33 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> I have pushed in my Github repo a new branch
>>>> (https://github.com/sobkowiak/servicemix/tree/ActiveMQ-5.10.0)
>>>> containing following changes
>>>>
>>>> * downgrade Karaf to 2.3.4 (to avoid the issue introduced with
>>>> 2.3.5)
>>>> * upgraded ActiveMQ to 2.10.0
>>>> * remove the ActiveMQ web console workaround (SM-2303
>>>>   <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2303>)
>>>>
>>>> Please feel free to checkout this branch and test. We can find
>>>> eventual
>>>> new issues introduced with 2.10.0.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 12.06.2014 11:30, Benjamin Graf (JIRA) wrote:
>>>>> Benjamin Graf created SM-2328:
>>>>> -
>>>>>
>>>>>    Summary: Upgrade to ActiveMQ 5.10.0
>>>>>Key: SM-2328
>>>>>URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2328
>>>>>Project: ServiceMix
>>>>> Issue Type: Task
>>>>> Components: assemblies
>>>>>   Reporter: Benjamin Graf
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
>>>>> (v6.2#6252)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: [jira] [Created] (SM-2328) Upgrade to ActiveMQ 5.10.0

One remark for upgrading 5.0.x. The activemq-camel in the new ActiveMQ
version (since 5.9.1) is no more merged with activemq-osgi ueberbundle.
Thus some additional changes in the ServiceMix ActiveMQ modules and
features have to be performed (look at the changes in activemq and
assembly modules in
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/?p=servicemix.git;a=commit;h=f6f10bf715621e056bdc691cfc705697b1907862)

On 13.06.2014 13:51, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
>
> I would give that a go, at least.  It looks like ActiveMQ 5.10.0 was
> built with Camel 2.13.1, but the features files are pointing to a
> version range of [2.12,3) for Camel, so it should work fine.  For
> something like Camel, where people are actually using the API/classes
> themselves, upgrading to a new minor version in a bugfix release would
> not work, but for ActiveMQ, people are mostly using this as a service
> provided by the platform so that should be a bit less of a concern.
> So yeah, I would do the ActiveMQ upgrade for 5.0.x as well.
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert Vanthienen
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
>  wrote:
>> Hi Gert
>>
>> Are we going to upgrade 5.0.x to ActiveMQ 5.10.0 too? Or the only change
>> should be downgrade to Karaf 2.3.4?
>>
>> Best regards
>> Krzysztof
>>
>> On 13.06.2014 13:07, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>>> L.S.,
>>>
>>>
>>> I have been testing with the changes on Krzysztof's branch and things
>>> do look a lot better there.  How about we just commit those to the
>>> servicemix-5.1.x branch, that makes it a bit easier for people to test
>>> and play with them. If things look OK to everyone, we could do a new
>>> 5.1.0 release with the older version of Karaf and the ActiveMQ upgrade
>>> to 5.10.0 on Monday?  Similarly, I think I would do the same changes
>>> on the servicemix-5.0.x branch and do a 5.0.2 release there as well.
>>> Wdyt?
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Gert Vanthienen
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Sobkowiak, Krzysztof
>>>  wrote:
>>>> Yes :-)
>>>>
>>>> On 13.06.2014 01:29, Raul Kripalani wrote:
>>>>> 2.10.0? You mean 5.10.0, right?
>>>>>
>>>>> Raúl.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12 Jun 2014, at 20:33, Krzysztof Sobkowiak 
>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have pushed in my Github repo a new branch
>>>>>> (https://github.com/sobkowiak/servicemix/tree/ActiveMQ-5.10.0)
>>>>>> containing following changes
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  * downgrade Karaf to 2.3.4 (to avoid the issue introduced with 2.3.5)
>>>>>>  * upgraded ActiveMQ to 2.10.0
>>>>>>  * remove the ActiveMQ web console workaround (SM-2303
>>>>>><https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2303>)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please feel free to checkout this branch and test. We can find eventual
>>>>>> new issues introduced with 2.10.0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards
>>>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 12.06.2014 11:30, Benjamin Graf (JIRA) wrote:
>>>>>>> Benjamin Graf created SM-2328:
>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Summary: Upgrade to ActiveMQ 5.10.0
>>>>>>> Key: SM-2328
>>>>>>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2328
>>>>>>> Project: ServiceMix
>>>>>>>  Issue Type: Task
>>>>>>>  Components: assemblies
>>>>>>>Reporter: Benjamin Graf
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
>>>>>>> (v6.2#6252)
>>>>>>>

-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: [jira] [Created] (SM-2328) Upgrade to ActiveMQ 5.10.0

Could you create a version 5.0.3 in Jira? I think, we have to reopen
some issues which have been solved by upgrade to Karaf 2.3.5 and will be
no more fixed after downgrade to 2.3.4 (like the Envers problem). We can
set the fix version to 5.1.1 and 5.0.3 which will be upgraded to Karaf
2.3.6 and the issues should be fixed again.

On 13.06.2014 14:58, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Good point.
>
> To limit the change on a minor release, I would just downgrade to
> Karaf 2.3.4 in SMX 5.0.x and keep ActiveMQ current version.
> We will focus on the 5.10 upgrade in SMX 5.1.x.
>
> My $0.01.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 06/13/2014 02:53 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:
>> One remark for upgrading 5.0.x. The activemq-camel in the new ActiveMQ
>> version (since 5.9.1) is no more merged with activemq-osgi ueberbundle.
>> Thus some additional changes in the ServiceMix ActiveMQ modules and
>> features have to be performed (look at the changes in activemq and
>> assembly modules in
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/?p=servicemix.git;a=commit;h=f6f10bf715621e056bdc691cfc705697b1907862)
>>
>>
>> On 13.06.2014 13:51, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>>> Hi Krzysztof,
>>>
>>> I would give that a go, at least.  It looks like ActiveMQ 5.10.0 was
>>> built with Camel 2.13.1, but the features files are pointing to a
>>> version range of [2.12,3) for Camel, so it should work fine.  For
>>> something like Camel, where people are actually using the API/classes
>>> themselves, upgrading to a new minor version in a bugfix release would
>>> not work, but for ActiveMQ, people are mostly using this as a service
>>> provided by the platform so that should be a bit less of a concern.
>>> So yeah, I would do the ActiveMQ upgrade for 5.0.x as well.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Gert Vanthienen
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
>>>  wrote:
>>>> Hi Gert
>>>>
>>>> Are we going to upgrade 5.0.x to ActiveMQ 5.10.0 too? Or the only
>>>> change
>>>> should be downgrade to Karaf 2.3.4?
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>
>>>> On 13.06.2014 13:07, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>>>>> L.S.,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have been testing with the changes on Krzysztof's branch and things
>>>>> do look a lot better there.  How about we just commit those to the
>>>>> servicemix-5.1.x branch, that makes it a bit easier for people to
>>>>> test
>>>>> and play with them. If things look OK to everyone, we could do a new
>>>>> 5.1.0 release with the older version of Karaf and the ActiveMQ
>>>>> upgrade
>>>>> to 5.10.0 on Monday?  Similarly, I think I would do the same changes
>>>>> on the servicemix-5.0.x branch and do a 5.0.2 release there as well.
>>>>> Wdyt?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Gert Vanthienen
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Sobkowiak, Krzysztof
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>> Yes :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 13.06.2014 01:29, Raul Kripalani wrote:
>>>>>>> 2.10.0? You mean 5.10.0, right?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Raúl.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 12 Jun 2014, at 20:33, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
>>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have pushed in my Github repo a new branch
>>>>>>>> (https://github.com/sobkowiak/servicemix/tree/ActiveMQ-5.10.0)
>>>>>>>> containing following changes
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>   * downgrade Karaf to 2.3.4 (to avoid the issue introduced
>>>>>>>> with 2.3.5)
>>>>>>>>   * upgraded ActiveMQ to 2.10.0
>>>>>>>>   * remove the ActiveMQ web console workaround (SM-2303
>>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2303>)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please feel free to checkout this branch and test. We can find
>>>>>>>> eventual
>>>>>>>> new issues introduced with 2.10.0.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best regards
>>>>>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 12.06.2014 11:30, Benjamin Graf (JIRA) wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Benjamin Graf created SM-2328:
>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  Summary: Upgrade to ActiveMQ 5.10.0
>>>>>>>>>  Key: SM-2328
>>>>>>>>>  URL:
>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2328
>>>>>>>>>  Project: ServiceMix
>>>>>>>>>   Issue Type: Task
>>>>>>>>>   Components: assemblies
>>>>>>>>> Reporter: Benjamin Graf
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>> This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
>>>>>>>>> (v6.2#6252)
>>>>>>>>>
>>
>


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: [jira] [Created] (SM-2328) Upgrade to ActiveMQ 5.10.0

Hi

I have downgraded servicemix-5.1.x and servicemix-5.0.x to Karaf 2.3.4
and upgraded master and servicemix-5.1.x to ActiveMQ 5.10.0. I have
reopened some issue which, I think, will be no more fixed after the
downgrade. We should check them again

Best regards
Krzysztof


On 13.06.2014 14:58, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Good point.
>
> To limit the change on a minor release, I would just downgrade to
> Karaf 2.3.4 in SMX 5.0.x and keep ActiveMQ current version.
> We will focus on the 5.10 upgrade in SMX 5.1.x.
>
> My $0.01.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 06/13/2014 02:53 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:
>> One remark for upgrading 5.0.x. The activemq-camel in the new ActiveMQ
>> version (since 5.9.1) is no more merged with activemq-osgi ueberbundle.
>> Thus some additional changes in the ServiceMix ActiveMQ modules and
>> features have to be performed (look at the changes in activemq and
>> assembly modules in
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/?p=servicemix.git;a=commit;h=f6f10bf715621e056bdc691cfc705697b1907862)
>>
>>
>> On 13.06.2014 13:51, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>>> Hi Krzysztof,
>>>
>>> I would give that a go, at least.  It looks like ActiveMQ 5.10.0 was
>>> built with Camel 2.13.1, but the features files are pointing to a
>>> version range of [2.12,3) for Camel, so it should work fine.  For
>>> something like Camel, where people are actually using the API/classes
>>> themselves, upgrading to a new minor version in a bugfix release would
>>> not work, but for ActiveMQ, people are mostly using this as a service
>>> provided by the platform so that should be a bit less of a concern.
>>> So yeah, I would do the ActiveMQ upgrade for 5.0.x as well.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Gert Vanthienen
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
>>>  wrote:
>>>> Hi Gert
>>>>
>>>> Are we going to upgrade 5.0.x to ActiveMQ 5.10.0 too? Or the only
>>>> change
>>>> should be downgrade to Karaf 2.3.4?
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>
>>>> On 13.06.2014 13:07, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>>>>> L.S.,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have been testing with the changes on Krzysztof's branch and things
>>>>> do look a lot better there.  How about we just commit those to the
>>>>> servicemix-5.1.x branch, that makes it a bit easier for people to
>>>>> test
>>>>> and play with them. If things look OK to everyone, we could do a new
>>>>> 5.1.0 release with the older version of Karaf and the ActiveMQ
>>>>> upgrade
>>>>> to 5.10.0 on Monday?  Similarly, I think I would do the same changes
>>>>> on the servicemix-5.0.x branch and do a 5.0.2 release there as well.
>>>>> Wdyt?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Gert Vanthienen
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Sobkowiak, Krzysztof
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>> Yes :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 13.06.2014 01:29, Raul Kripalani wrote:
>>>>>>> 2.10.0? You mean 5.10.0, right?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Raúl.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 12 Jun 2014, at 20:33, Krzysztof Sobkowiak
>>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have pushed in my Github repo a new branch
>>>>>>>> (https://github.com/sobkowiak/servicemix/tree/ActiveMQ-5.10.0)
>>>>>>>> containing following changes
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>   * downgrade Karaf to 2.3.4 (to avoid the issue introduced
>>>>>>>> with 2.3.5)
>>>>>>>>   * upgraded ActiveMQ to 2.10.0
>>>>>>>>   * remove the ActiveMQ web console workaround (SM-2303
>>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2303>)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please feel free to checkout this branch and test. We can find
>>>>>>>> eventual
>>>>>>>> new issues introduced with 2.10.0.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best regards
>>>>>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 12.06.2014 11:30, Benjamin Graf (JIRA) wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Benjamin Graf created SM-2328:
>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  Summary: Upgrade to ActiveMQ 5.10.0
>>>>>>>>>  Key: SM-2328
>>>>>>>>>  URL:
>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2328
>>>>>>>>>  Project: ServiceMix
>>>>>>>>>   Issue Type: Task
>>>>>>>>>   Components: assemblies
>>>>>>>>> Reporter: Benjamin Graf
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>> This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
>>>>>>>>> (v6.2#6252)
>>>>>>>>>
>>
>


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Old ServiceMix 3.4.x and jbi issues

2014-06-16 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

Hi

In SM JIRA we have some issues detected for ServiceMix 3.4.2 and JBI.
Shouldn't we close these issues? Eventually first check, whether any of
them still exists in 4.x or 5.x?

Best regards
Krzysztof

-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: Ready for 5.0.2 and 5.1.0?

2014-06-16 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

I'm working on SM-2313

On 16.06.2014 20:27, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
> L.S.,
>
>
> We've been going over the remaining JIRA issues today and most issues
> have been either fixed or deferred to the next versions.  If anyone
> has the time to apply the pull request for
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2313, that might be a nice
> one to pick up.
>
> Other than that one, if nobody has anything urgent that needs to get
> fixed, I'd like to the 5.1.0 release tomorrow and if there's any time
> left, also do the 5.0.2 release.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert Vanthienen


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: Ready for 5.0.2 and 5.1.0?

2014-06-16 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

Done. I think, it's good time to prepare the release. I hope the tests
will be more positive than in the last probe :-)

Best regards
Krzysztof

On 16.06.2014 20:41, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:
> I'm working on SM-2313
>
> On 16.06.2014 20:27, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>> L.S.,
>>
>>
>> We've been going over the remaining JIRA issues today and most issues
>> have been either fixed or deferred to the next versions.  If anyone
>> has the time to apply the pull request for
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM-2313, that might be a nice
>> one to pick up.
>>
>> Other than that one, if nobody has anything urgent that needs to get
>> fixed, I'd like to the 5.1.0 release tomorrow and if there's any time
>> left, also do the 5.0.2 release.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Gert Vanthienen
>


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Alfresco repository

2014-06-17 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

Hi

Do we still need the alfresco repository in org.ops4j.pax.url.mvn.cfg?
The file still contains an entry for the repository.

https://maven.alfresco.com/nexus/content/groups/public/@id=maven.alfresco.repo

I think, after Activiti upgrade everything should be available in
Central. Isn't it true?

Best regards
Krzysztof


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ServiceMix 5.1.0 (take 2)

2014-06-17 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

+1  

Tested ActiveMQ Quick start problem, ActiveMQ console and ActiveMQ
sample, Activiti, Drools samples, Camel SOAP and REST, CXF SOAP and REST
-- all with more SMX restarts. For me it looks ok.

Best regards
Krzysztof



On 17.06.2014 14:38, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
> L.S.,
>
>
> This is a vote to release Apache ServiceMix 5.1.0.
>
> The staging area is available at
>   https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheservicemix-1011
>
> An overview of issues fixed in this release can be found in JIRA at
>   https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM/fixforversion/12326660
>
> The scm tag is available on
>   
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=servicemix.git;a=commit;h=e20fc8d9edd0828b011d14ecb75e5cc6a70fce6a
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
>
> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> [ ] -1 Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
>
> This vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert Vanthienen


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ServiceMix 5.0.2

2014-06-18 Thread Krzysztof Sobkowiak

+1

Best regards
Krzysztof

On 18.06.2014 08:50, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
> L.S.,
>
>
> This is a vote to release Apache ServiceMix 5.0.2.
>
> The staging area is available at
>   https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheservicemix-1012
>
> An overview of issues fixed in this release can be found in JIRA at
>   https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SM/fixforversion/12326849
>
> The scm tag is available on
>   
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=servicemix.git;a=tag;h=4669ff8ff77844221ceb9c3c73fce0afdfa9cb33
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
>
> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> [ ] -1 Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
>
> This vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert Vanthienen


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: About "Release Apache ServiceMix 5.0.2"

or: Did not receive reporting containing
>>> ITEM1,2,15.,4.8990
>>> at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:88)
>>> at
>>>
>> org.apache.servicemix.examples.akka.StatsTest.expectReport(StatsTest.scala:60)
>>> at
>>>
>> org.apache.servicemix.examples.akka.StatsTest.expectReport(StatsTest.scala:61)
>>> at
>>>
>> org.apache.servicemix.examples.akka.StatsTest.expectReport(StatsTest.scala:61)
>>> at
>>>
>> org.apache.servicemix.examples.akka.StatsTest.expectReport(StatsTest.scala:61)
>>> at
>>>
>> org.apache.servicemix.examples.akka.StatsTest.expectReport(StatsTest.scala:61)
>>> at
>>>
>> org.apache.servicemix.examples.akka.StatsTest.expectReport(StatsTest.scala:61)
>>> at
>>>
>> org.apache.servicemix.examples.akka.StatsTest.expectReport(StatsTest.scala:61)
>>> at
>>>
>> org.apache.servicemix.examples.akka.StatsTest.expectReport(StatsTest.scala:61)
>>> at
>>>
>> org.apache.servicemix.examples.akka.StatsTest.expectReport(StatsTest.scala:61)
>>> at
>>>
>> org.apache.servicemix.examples.akka.StatsTest.expectReport(StatsTest.scala:61)
>>> at
>>>
>> org.apache.servicemix.examples.akka.StatsTest.expectReport(StatsTest.scala:61)
>>> at
>>>
>> org.apache.servicemix.examples.akka.StatsTest.expectReport(StatsTest.scala:56)
>>> at
>>>
>> org.apache.servicemix.examples.akka.StatsTest.testCountAverageAndStddev(StatsTest.scala:50)
>>> Results :
>>>
>>> Failed tests:
>>>
>>>
>> StatsTest.testCountAverageAndStddev:50->expectReport:56->expectReport:61->expectReport:61->expectReport:61->expectReport:61->expectReport:61->expectReport:61->expectReport:61->ex
>>> pectReport:61->expectReport:61->expectReport:61->expectReport:60 Did not
>>> receive reporting containing ITEM1,2,15.,4.8990
>>>
>>> Tests run: 2, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0
>>>
>>> About Akka problem, I don't know how much it is important and relevant, I
>>> don't use Akka and don't know if the error is severe or not.
>>>
>>> About the missing dependency to build Assembly, it affects probably only
>> me
>>> and it is only a problem for building the sources, but I would appreciate
>>> if we can do something as it will give more consistency to the source
>> code.
>>> Hope this helps
>>> Thank you,
>>> Cristiano
>>>
>>>
>>> P.S Last time (smx 5.0.0) I had the same problem with the Assembly
>> project,
>>> I was able to reconfigure my environment to build skipping the internal
>>> repo mirror and it did worked, however it is time consuming and I'm much
>>> busy now to make the switch for testing the build...


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ServiceMix 5.1.0 (take 2)

Hi Raul

Could you please test following configuration?

org.ops4j.pax.url.mvn.repositories= \
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2@id=maven.central.repo, \
   
http://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots-group@snapshots@noreleases@id=apache.snapshots.repo,
\
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/m2-repo@id=maven.smx.repo, \
   
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheservicemix-1012@id=smx.stage.repo,
\
   
http://repository.springsource.com/maven/bundles/release@id=springsource.release.repo,
\
   
http://repository.springsource.com/maven/bundles/external@id=springsource.external.repo,
\
   
http://oss.sonatype.org/content/repositories/releases/@id=maven.sonatype.repo,
\
   
https://maven.alfresco.com/nexus/content/groups/public/@id=maven.alfresco.repo

It works for me with no problem


Best regards
Krzysztof

On 19.06.2014 18:28, Raul Kripalani wrote:
> features:install examples-cxf-jaxrs


-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ServiceMix 5.1.0 (take 2)

I have purged today the whole local repository to test the other problem
with equinox.  I have nothing for servicemix 5.1.0 in my local repo. I
have previously sent you a config for servicemix 5.0.2. Please check this

org.ops4j.pax.url.mvn.repositories= \
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2@id=maven.central.repo, \
   
http://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots-group@snapshots@noreleases@id=apache.snapshots.repo,
\
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/m2-repo@id=maven.smx.repo, \
   
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheservicemix-1011@id=smx.stage.repo,
\
   
http://repository.springsource.com/maven/bundles/release@id=springsource.release.repo,
\
   
http://repository.springsource.com/maven/bundles/external@id=springsource.external.repo,
\
   
http://oss.sonatype.org/content/repositories/releases/@id=maven.sonatype.repo,
\
   
https://maven.alfresco.com/nexus/content/groups/public/@id=maven.alfresco.repo

But indeed, I could now reproduce twice your problem, but at third time
it could be installed. I tried again with fresh servicemix and it works
too. Could it be a problem with the staging repo?


On 19.06.2014 19:38, Raul Kripalani wrote:
> Still the same on my end :-( I deleted the data directory and started from
> scratch. The same.
>
> This artefact is not available in my local Maven repo (in your test it
> might have been available in your local repo, if you built the release
> locally):
>
> [raul@~/.m2/repository/org/apache/servicemix/examples/cxf-jaxrs$] ls -lrt
> total 8
> drwxr-xr-x  6 raul  staff  204 Dec  8  2012 4.5.0-SNAPSHOT
> drwxr-xr-x  6 raul  staff  204 Feb 16 23:05 5.0.0-SNAPSHOT
> drwxr-xr-x  6 raul  staff  204 Mar 16 19:05 5.0.1-SNAPSHOT
> -rw-r--r--  1 raul  staff  439 Mar 16 19:10 maven-metadata-local.xml
> drwxr-xr-x  5 raul  staff  170 Mar 16 19:10 5.0.0
>
> So I'm quite sure that it's picking it up from the staging repo... In fact,
> here's the proof:
>
> 18:34:09,279 | DEBUG | l Console Thread | HttpURLConnection
>  |  -  -  | sun.net.www.MessageHeader@3fa412f87 pairs: {GET
> /content/repositories/orgapacheservicemix-1012/org/apache/servicemix/examples/cxf-jaxrs/5.1.0/cxf-jaxrs-5.1.0.jar
> HTTP/1.1: null}{User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64)
> AppleWebKit/537.11 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/23.0.1271.95
> Safari/537.11}{Cache-Control: no-cache}{Pragma: no-cache}{Host:
> repository.apache.org}{Accept: text/html, image/gif, image/jpeg, *; q=.2,
> */*; q=.2}{Connection: keep-alive}
> 18:34:09,569 | DEBUG | l Console Thread | HttpURLConnection
>  |  -  -  | sun.net.www.MessageHeader@2cd9786c10 pairs: {null: HTTP/1.1 404
> Not Found}{Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 17:34:09 GMT}{Server:
> Nexus/2.7.2-03}{Accept-Ranges: bytes}{Content-Type: text/html}{Set-Cookie:
> rememberMe=deleteMe; Path=/; Max-Age=0; Expires=Wed, 18-Jun-2014 17:34:09
> GMT}{Vary: Accept-Encoding}{Keep-Alive: timeout=5, max=100}{Connection:
> Keep-Alive}{Transfer-Encoding: chunked}
> 18:34:09,569 | DEBUG | l Console Thread | Connection
> | 1 - org.ops4j.pax.url.mvn - 1.3.7 |   Could not download [Version [5.1.0]
> from URL [
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheservicemix-1012/org/apache/servicemix/examples/cxf-jaxrs/5.1.0/cxf-jaxrs-5.1.0.jar
> ]]
>
> Right now the Apache Maven Repo is returning an HTTP 503. Perhaps it could
> be all related...
>
> Regards,
>
> *Raúl Kripalani*
> Apache Camel PMC Member & Committer | Enterprise Architect, Open Source
> Integration specialist
> http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
>
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 6:03 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak <
> krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Raul
>>
>> Could you please test following configuration?
>>
>> org.ops4j.pax.url.mvn.repositories= \
>> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2@id=maven.central.repo, \
>>
>>
>> http://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots-group@snapshots@noreleases@id=apache.snapshots.repo
>> ,
>> \
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/m2-repo@id=maven.smx.repo,
>> \
>>
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheservicemix-1012@id=smx.stage.repo
>> ,
>> \
>>
>>
>> http://repository.springsource.com/maven/bundles/release@id=springsource.release.repo
>> ,
>> \
>>
>>
>> http://repository.springsource.com/maven/bundles/external@id=springsource.external.repo
>> ,
>> \
>>
>>
>> http://oss.sonatype.org/content/repositories/releases/@id=maven.sonatype.repo
>> ,
>> \
>>
>>
>> https://maven.alfresco.com/nexus/content/groups/public/@id=maven.alfresco

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ServiceMix 5.1.0 (take 2)

> I tried again with fresh servicemix and it works too.
I meant: I can not reproduce this problem anymore

On 19.06.2014 19:51, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote:
> I have purged today the whole local repository to test the other
> problem with equinox.  I have nothing for servicemix 5.1.0 in my local
> repo. I have previously sent you a config for servicemix 5.0.2. Please
> check this
>
> org.ops4j.pax.url.mvn.repositories= \
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2@id=maven.central.repo, \
>
> http://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots-group@snapshots@noreleases@id=apache.snapshots.repo,
> \
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/m2-repo@id=maven.smx.repo, \
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheservicemix-1011@id=smx.stage.repo,
> \
>
> http://repository.springsource.com/maven/bundles/release@id=springsource.release.repo,
> \
>
> http://repository.springsource.com/maven/bundles/external@id=springsource.external.repo,
> \
>
> http://oss.sonatype.org/content/repositories/releases/@id=maven.sonatype.repo,
> \
>
> https://maven.alfresco.com/nexus/content/groups/public/@id=maven.alfresco.repo
>
> But indeed, I could now reproduce twice your problem, but at third
> time it could be installed. I tried again with fresh servicemix and it
> works too. Could it be a problem with the staging repo?
>

-- 
Krzysztof Sobkowiak

JEE & OSS Architect | Technical Architect @ Capgemini
Capgemini <http://www.pl.capgemini.com/> | Software Solutions Center
<http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/> | Wroclaw
e-mail: krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com <mailto:krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com> |
Twitter: @KSobkowiak
Calendar: goo.gl/yvsebC

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ServiceMix 5.1.0 (take 2)

I hope the artifacts can be promoted with no problem to central like by
the last releases (missing drools samples in central). Could be such
problem like the one reported by Raul a cause of the promotion problem?
When the samples are sometimes not accessible in staging repository the
can be missing in central too, when the problem happens while promoting.

On 19.06.2014 19:57, Raul Kripalani wrote:
> Yes, I figured my old repo was already correct (1011) when I saw only 5.0.2
> versions in repo 1012.
>
> Now it works properly. I think there was a glitch in the staging repo as
> you say.
>
> Here's my +1 non-binding again.
>
> Regards,

Download links for ServiceMix are dead