Re: [PROPOSAL] Several proposals

[mikevan <mv...@comcast.net>]

JB, instead of widening the scope of the features, shouldn't we be focusing
on implementing something similar to that which is proposed in the OSGi
Service Platform Subsystems proposed specification?  

-----
Mike Van  (All links open in new tabs)
Committer - Kalumet 

Atraxia Technologies 

NCI Inc 

Mike Van's Open Source Technologies Blog 
--
View this message in context: http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Several-proposals-tp3460542p3471054.html
Sent from the Karaf - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [PROPOSAL] Several proposals

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>]

Hi Mike,

We HAVE TO implement something similar to subsystems. However subsystems 
is part of OSGi 4.3, and so focus on trunk/Karaf 3.0.

I think that we have to address the problem on Karaf 2.2.x (so OSGi r4.2).

I have no problem to have two different approaches: one "subsystems 
oriented" for the trunk, one "features oriented" for the 2.2.x branch.

Another solution is to not handle this issue on 2.2.x branch and focus 
on trunk.
But it means that we need a bunch of time to stabilize Karaf 3.0.

I wonder if creating a Karaf 2.3 branch could not have sense. It will 
give community new releases including new fixes, etc, and give us more 
time to stabilize Karaf 3.0.

Regards
JB

On 11/01/2011 04:52 PM, mikevan wrote:
> JB, instead of widening the scope of the features, shouldn't we be focusing
> on implementing something similar to that which is proposed in the OSGi
> Service Platform Subsystems proposed specification?
>
> -----
> Mike Van  (All links open in new tabs)
> Committer - Kalumet
>
> Atraxia Technologies
>
> NCI Inc
>
> Mike Van's Open Source Technologies Blog
> --
> View this message in context: http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Several-proposals-tp3460542p3471054.html
> Sent from the Karaf - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

-- 
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com