You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@servicemix.apache.org by Karolis Petrauskas <k....@gmail.com> on 2011/11/16 08:35:50 UTC
Re: Toward ServiceMix 4.4
Hello,
When do you expect to release ServiceMix 4.4?
Thanks in advance,
Karolis
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Gert Vanthienen
<ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> L.S.,
>
>
> So it looks like both the CXF and Camel community can help us out with a
> quick fix release here, so let's make sure we're ready to follow up with our
> ServiceMix 4.4.0 release batch as soon as those are done. We definitely owe
> them an extra credit in the release announcement as well, imho ;)
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert Vanthienen
> ------------------------
> FuseSource
> Web: http://fusesource.com
> Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Gert Vanthienen
> <ge...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> L.S.,
>>
>>
>> OK, so it looks like we have two options here:
>> #1. Karaf 2.2.2, CXF 2.4.2, Camel 2.8.1 and Spring 3.0.5.RELEASE, all of
>> which is available right now so we can start the release process any day now
>> #2. Karaf 2.2.4, CXF 2.4.4 and/or CXF 2.5.0 and a matching Camel release -
>> this would mean we're waiting for a few more weeks again until the CXF and
>> Camel release are done
>>
>> Based on Dan's last mail, I'll ping the camel dev list to see if they have
>> some bandwidth to do a quick Camel 2.8.3 release after the CXF 2.4.4 release
>> is done - if there's a way to get things aligned in the next week or 2, it's
>> probably well worth the wait. Otherwise, I'd suggest we go with #1 and plan
>> for a follow-up release once Camel 2.9.0 is out.
>>
>> In the meanwhile, let's try to work with the Karaf team to figure out a
>> solution for some of these dependency alignment issues we're facing (e.g.
>> with the references to other features.xml files) to ensure we don't have to
>> do this exercise every time again. If we could get the features
>> cross-referencing issue resolved and make the features-maven-plugin a bit
>> more version-aware, we should be able to get things out way quicker than
>> what we're doing now... FYI - the thread for that discussion is at
>> http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/Features-td3423534.html
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Gert Vanthienen
>> ------------------------
>> FuseSource
>> Web: http://fusesource.com
>> Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 1:25 PM, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, October 26, 2011 12:11:32 PM Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>>> > L.S.,
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Unless someone sees a real issue in the inconvenience of having the two
>>> CXF
>>> > features URLs in the assembly, I'm guessing we're going for Karaf
>>> 2.2.4/CXF
>>> > 2.4.4/Spring 3.0.6.RELEASE/... here for ServiceMix 4.4. I'll start
>>> updating
>>> > the POMs again to bump versions.
>>> >
>>> > BTW, I also understand the Camel community is planning to do a Camel
>>> 2.9.0
>>> > release somewhere in the next few days -
>>>
>>> It's only a 2.9.0-RC1, not a full 2.9.0 release. That's likely a couple
>>> weeks away. I'm actually hoping to get 2.9.0 on CXF 2.5.0 by then.
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > would it be worth waiting for that
>>> > one too (and perhaps we can ask them to consider upgrading to CXF 2.4.4
>>> as
>>> > well, that the entire universe is back in line)?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> >
>>> > Gert Vanthienen
>>> > ------------------------
>>> > FuseSource
>>> > Web: http://fusesource.com
>>> > Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Gert Vanthienen <
>>> gert.vanthienen@gmail.com
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > L.S.,
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks for pointing that out! It's good to know that the CXF
>>> community
>>> > > can facilitate those quick fix releases if necessary. By all means,
>>> if
>>> > > you or any of the other guys has some bandwidth to do the extra
>>> > > release, that would obviously be great. I guess the 'quick fix' that
>>> > > Freeman mentioned became the real solution then...
>>> > >
>>> > > I just gave things a quick try here and just upgrading to CXF
>>> > > 2.4.4-SNAPSHOT does seem to work out fine for the most part. There
>>> are
>>> > > some test failures in some of the itests, but those may well be
>>> > > something I missed in my attempt to quickly test this. Other than
>>> > > that, the resulting kit does seem to work fine - it does have multiple
>>> > > versions of the CXF features descriptor installed because the Camel
>>> > > descriptor still points at the old version (cfr. one of the issues
>>> that
>>> > > came up in the 'Features' thread earlier on).
>>> > >
>>> > > As far as I am concerned, this is just a minor inconvenience compared
>>> to
>>> > > the possible benefit of being able to upgrade to more recent fix
>>> > > versions of almost anything else, so if the offer to provide a CXF
>>> > > 2.4.4 fix release still stands, we'd highly appreciate that.
>>> > >
>>> > > (my apologies for the annoyance - it was in no way intentional, in
>>> > > ServiceMix-land we always have to wait for the entire universe to
>>> align
>>> > > to do a release - fancy a Belgian beer or some chocolates some day to
>>> > > make up for it ? ;)).
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > Regards,
>>> > >
>>> > > Gert Vanthienen
>>> > > ------------------------
>>> > > FuseSource
>>> > > Web: http://fusesource.com
>>> > > Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>>> > >
>>> > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >> I just want to point out that I find it slightly "annoying" that,
>>> > >> throughout
>>> > >> this discussion, not one person has even asked on the CXF lists what
>>> > >> it
>>> > >> would
>>> > >> take to get a 2.4.4 release out that fixes the issue. CXF is likely
>>> > >> the community that would be MOST willing to get releases out to fix
>>> > >> issues, it's
>>> > >> just a matter of asking. It's been done for Geronimo. It's been
>>> done
>>> > >> for JBoss. etc....
>>> > >>
>>> > >> I'm planning on doing the CXF 2.5.0 builds later this week or early
>>> > >> next
>>> > >> week
>>> > >> (as discussed on dev@cxf earlier this month). Doing the 2.4.4
>>> > >> release
>>> > >> at the
>>> > >> same time is not a big deal. We could have done one sooner if
>>> someone
>>> > >> would
>>> > >> have asked. For that matter, Freeman, Guillaume, Willem, etc..
>>> > >> could
>>> > >> have
>>> > >> easily started a CXF release. Unlike smx releases, CXF releases are
>>> > >> fairly
>>> > >> quick and easy. Mostly painless. :-) And documented:
>>> > >>
>>> > >> http://cxf.apache.org/release-management.html
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Dan
>>> > >>
>>> > >> On Monday, October 24, 2011 11:54:23 AM Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>>> > >> > Hey Freeman,
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > I missed the remark that we're stuck on the backlevel versions -
>>> > >> > I'll
>>> > >>
>>> > >> make
>>> > >>
>>> > >> > the necessary corrections to get things on these versions again.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > FWIW, I do think we have to figure out a way to improve features
>>> > >>
>>> > >> descriptors
>>> > >>
>>> > >> > to avoid being stuck on entire set of backlevel artifacts just
>>> > >> > because
>>> > >>
>>> > >> of
>>> > >>
>>> > >> > one issue in one of the dependencies. There should be no
>>> > >> > technical
>>> > >>
>>> > >> reason
>>> > >>
>>> > >> > why we can't upgrade to Spring 3.0.6.RELEASE because of an issue
>>> > >> > in CXF 2.4.2 in my mind - shouldn't OSGi version ranges allow us
>>> > >> > to just do>>
>>> > >> these
>>> > >>
>>> > >> > little upgrades without breaking everything else?
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > Regards,
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > Gert Vanthienen
>>> > >> > ------------------------
>>> > >> > FuseSource
>>> > >> > Web: http://fusesource.com
>>> > >> > Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Freeman Fang
>>> > >>
>>> > >> <fr...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> > >> > > Hi JB,
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > > CXF 2.4.3 has a problem that the http-osgi transport can't
>>> > >> > > work with
>>> > >> > > felix, also the cxf 2.4.3 use spring 3.0.6 which can't work
>>> > >> > > with karaf 2.2.2, also camel 2.8.1 use cxf 2.4.2, for the
>>> > >> > > reason above all, we should use CXF 2.4.2/Camel 2.8.1/Karaf
>>> > >> > > 2.2.2 for SMX 4.4.
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > > Btw, I just revert for components trunk so that we still use
>>> > >> > > cxf
>>> > >>
>>> > >> 2.4.2.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> > > Regards
>>> > >> > > Freeman
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > > On 2011-10-17, at 下午5:24, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>>> > >> > > Hi all,
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > >> All required dependencies are now available to ServiceMix
>>> > >> > >> 4.4:
>>> > >> > >> - CXF 2.4.3 has been released and available on Maven central
>>> > >> > >> repo
>>> > >> > >> - Camel 2.8.1 has been released and available on Maven
>>> > >> > >> central repo
>>> > >> > >> - ActiveMQ 5.5.0 is available
>>> > >> > >> - Karaf 2.2.2 is available
>>> > >> > >>
>>> > >> > >> I think that we are ready for the ServiceMix 4.4 release.
>>> > >> > >>
>>> > >> > >> As discussed before, the releases will be performed in a
>>> > >> > >> row, it
>>> > >> > >> means:
>>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix Utils 1.5.0
>>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix Components 2011.02
>>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix NMR 1.5.0
>>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix (Features) 4.4.0
>>> > >> > >>
>>> > >> > >> and in a second row:
>>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix 3.4
>>> > >> > >>
>>> > >> > >> I guess that the following Jiras should be fixed before
>>> > >> > >> release:
>>> > >> > >> - SMX4-939
>>> > >> > >> - SMX4-916
>>> > >> > >> - SMX4-885
>>> > >> > >> - SMX4-884
>>> > >> > >> - SMX4NMR-269
>>> > >> > >>
>>> > >> > >> I will pick up some. It could be great if we can cut off the
>>> > >> > >> releases at
>>> > >> > >> the end of this week.
>>> > >> > >>
>>> > >> > >> WDYT ?
>>> > >> > >>
>>> > >> > >> Regards
>>> > >> > >> JB
>>> > >> > >> --
>>> > >> > >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>> > >> > >> jbonofre@apache.org
>>> > >> > >> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>> > >> > >> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > > ------------------------------**---------------
>>> > >> > > Freeman Fang
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > > FuseSource
>>> > >> > > Email:ffang@fusesource.com
>>> > >> > > Web: fusesource.com
>>> > >> > > Twitter: freemanfang
>>> > >> > > Blog: http://freemanfang.blogspot.**com
>>> > >> > > <http://freemanfang.blogspot.com>
>>> > >>
>>> > >> --
>>> > >> Daniel Kulp
>>> > >> dkulp@apache.org
>>> > >> http://dankulp.com/blog
>>> > >> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>> --
>>> Daniel Kulp
>>> dkulp@apache.org
>>> http://dankulp.com/blog
>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: Toward ServiceMix 4.4
Posted by Karolis Petrauskas <k....@gmail.com>.
Thanks!
Karolis
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Gert Vanthienen
<ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Karolis,
>
> The Camel 2.8.3 vote has been started today, so that will take a few more
> days (if it passes) before that will be available. We should be able to
> follow up with the ServiceMix release builds a few days after the Camel
> release is out in the wild, so I'd expect a release vote somewhere next
> week.
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert Vanthienen
> ------------------------
> FuseSource
> Web: http://fusesource.com
> Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 8:35 AM, Karolis Petrauskas
> <k....@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> When do you expect to release ServiceMix 4.4?
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>> Karolis
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Gert Vanthienen
>> <ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > L.S.,
>> >
>> >
>> > So it looks like both the CXF and Camel community can help us out with a
>> > quick fix release here, so let's make sure we're ready to follow up with
>> our
>> > ServiceMix 4.4.0 release batch as soon as those are done. We definitely
>> owe
>> > them an extra credit in the release announcement as well, imho ;)
>> >
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Gert Vanthienen
>> > ------------------------
>> > FuseSource
>> > Web: http://fusesource.com
>> > Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Gert Vanthienen
>> > <ge...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >
>> >> L.S.,
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> OK, so it looks like we have two options here:
>> >> #1. Karaf 2.2.2, CXF 2.4.2, Camel 2.8.1 and Spring 3.0.5.RELEASE, all of
>> >> which is available right now so we can start the release process any
>> day now
>> >> #2. Karaf 2.2.4, CXF 2.4.4 and/or CXF 2.5.0 and a matching Camel
>> release -
>> >> this would mean we're waiting for a few more weeks again until the CXF
>> and
>> >> Camel release are done
>> >>
>> >> Based on Dan's last mail, I'll ping the camel dev list to see if they
>> have
>> >> some bandwidth to do a quick Camel 2.8.3 release after the CXF 2.4.4
>> release
>> >> is done - if there's a way to get things aligned in the next week or 2,
>> it's
>> >> probably well worth the wait. Otherwise, I'd suggest we go with #1 and
>> plan
>> >> for a follow-up release once Camel 2.9.0 is out.
>> >>
>> >> In the meanwhile, let's try to work with the Karaf team to figure out a
>> >> solution for some of these dependency alignment issues we're facing
>> (e.g.
>> >> with the references to other features.xml files) to ensure we don't
>> have to
>> >> do this exercise every time again. If we could get the features
>> >> cross-referencing issue resolved and make the features-maven-plugin a
>> bit
>> >> more version-aware, we should be able to get things out way quicker than
>> >> what we're doing now... FYI - the thread for that discussion is at
>> >> http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/Features-td3423534.html
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >>
>> >> Gert Vanthienen
>> >> ------------------------
>> >> FuseSource
>> >> Web: http://fusesource.com
>> >> Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 1:25 PM, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On Wednesday, October 26, 2011 12:11:32 PM Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>> >>> > L.S.,
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Unless someone sees a real issue in the inconvenience of having the
>> two
>> >>> CXF
>> >>> > features URLs in the assembly, I'm guessing we're going for Karaf
>> >>> 2.2.4/CXF
>> >>> > 2.4.4/Spring 3.0.6.RELEASE/... here for ServiceMix 4.4. I'll start
>> >>> updating
>> >>> > the POMs again to bump versions.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > BTW, I also understand the Camel community is planning to do a Camel
>> >>> 2.9.0
>> >>> > release somewhere in the next few days -
>> >>>
>> >>> It's only a 2.9.0-RC1, not a full 2.9.0 release. That's likely a
>> couple
>> >>> weeks away. I'm actually hoping to get 2.9.0 on CXF 2.5.0 by then.
>> >>>
>> >>> Dan
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> > would it be worth waiting for that
>> >>> > one too (and perhaps we can ask them to consider upgrading to CXF
>> 2.4.4
>> >>> as
>> >>> > well, that the entire universe is back in line)?
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Regards,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Gert Vanthienen
>> >>> > ------------------------
>> >>> > FuseSource
>> >>> > Web: http://fusesource.com
>> >>> > Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Gert Vanthienen <
>> >>> gert.vanthienen@gmail.com
>> >>> > > wrote:
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > L.S.,
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Thanks for pointing that out! It's good to know that the CXF
>> >>> community
>> >>> > > can facilitate those quick fix releases if necessary. By all
>> means,
>> >>> if
>> >>> > > you or any of the other guys has some bandwidth to do the extra
>> >>> > > release, that would obviously be great. I guess the 'quick fix'
>> that
>> >>> > > Freeman mentioned became the real solution then...
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > I just gave things a quick try here and just upgrading to CXF
>> >>> > > 2.4.4-SNAPSHOT does seem to work out fine for the most part. There
>> >>> are
>> >>> > > some test failures in some of the itests, but those may well be
>> >>> > > something I missed in my attempt to quickly test this. Other than
>> >>> > > that, the resulting kit does seem to work fine - it does have
>> multiple
>> >>> > > versions of the CXF features descriptor installed because the Camel
>> >>> > > descriptor still points at the old version (cfr. one of the issues
>> >>> that
>> >>> > > came up in the 'Features' thread earlier on).
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > As far as I am concerned, this is just a minor inconvenience
>> compared
>> >>> to
>> >>> > > the possible benefit of being able to upgrade to more recent fix
>> >>> > > versions of almost anything else, so if the offer to provide a CXF
>> >>> > > 2.4.4 fix release still stands, we'd highly appreciate that.
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > (my apologies for the annoyance - it was in no way intentional, in
>> >>> > > ServiceMix-land we always have to wait for the entire universe to
>> >>> align
>> >>> > > to do a release - fancy a Belgian beer or some chocolates some day
>> to
>> >>> > > make up for it ? ;)).
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Regards,
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Gert Vanthienen
>> >>> > > ------------------------
>> >>> > > FuseSource
>> >>> > > Web: http://fusesource.com
>> >>> > > Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> > >> I just want to point out that I find it slightly "annoying" that,
>> >>> > >> throughout
>> >>> > >> this discussion, not one person has even asked on the CXF lists
>> what
>> >>> > >> it
>> >>> > >> would
>> >>> > >> take to get a 2.4.4 release out that fixes the issue. CXF is
>> likely
>> >>> > >> the community that would be MOST willing to get releases out to
>> fix
>> >>> > >> issues, it's
>> >>> > >> just a matter of asking. It's been done for Geronimo. It's been
>> >>> done
>> >>> > >> for JBoss. etc....
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> I'm planning on doing the CXF 2.5.0 builds later this week or
>> early
>> >>> > >> next
>> >>> > >> week
>> >>> > >> (as discussed on dev@cxf earlier this month). Doing the 2.4.4
>> >>> > >> release
>> >>> > >> at the
>> >>> > >> same time is not a big deal. We could have done one sooner if
>> >>> someone
>> >>> > >> would
>> >>> > >> have asked. For that matter, Freeman, Guillaume, Willem, etc..
>> >>> > >> could
>> >>> > >> have
>> >>> > >> easily started a CXF release. Unlike smx releases, CXF releases
>> are
>> >>> > >> fairly
>> >>> > >> quick and easy. Mostly painless. :-) And documented:
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> http://cxf.apache.org/release-management.html
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> Dan
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> On Monday, October 24, 2011 11:54:23 AM Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>> >>> > >> > Hey Freeman,
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > I missed the remark that we're stuck on the backlevel versions -
>> >>> > >> > I'll
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> make
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> > the necessary corrections to get things on these versions again.
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > FWIW, I do think we have to figure out a way to improve features
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> descriptors
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> > to avoid being stuck on entire set of backlevel artifacts just
>> >>> > >> > because
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> of
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> > one issue in one of the dependencies. There should be no
>> >>> > >> > technical
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> reason
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> > why we can't upgrade to Spring 3.0.6.RELEASE because of an issue
>> >>> > >> > in CXF 2.4.2 in my mind - shouldn't OSGi version ranges allow us
>> >>> > >> > to just do>>
>> >>> > >> these
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> > little upgrades without breaking everything else?
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > Regards,
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > Gert Vanthienen
>> >>> > >> > ------------------------
>> >>> > >> > FuseSource
>> >>> > >> > Web: http://fusesource.com
>> >>> > >> > Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Freeman Fang
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> <fr...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > Hi JB,
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > CXF 2.4.3 has a problem that the http-osgi transport can't
>> >>> > >> > > work with
>> >>> > >> > > felix, also the cxf 2.4.3 use spring 3.0.6 which can't work
>> >>> > >> > > with karaf 2.2.2, also camel 2.8.1 use cxf 2.4.2, for the
>> >>> > >> > > reason above all, we should use CXF 2.4.2/Camel 2.8.1/Karaf
>> >>> > >> > > 2.2.2 for SMX 4.4.
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > Btw, I just revert for components trunk so that we still use
>> >>> > >> > > cxf
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> 2.4.2.
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> > > Regards
>> >>> > >> > > Freeman
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > On 2011-10-17, at 下午5:24, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > Hi all,
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > >> All required dependencies are now available to ServiceMix
>> >>> > >> > >> 4.4:
>> >>> > >> > >> - CXF 2.4.3 has been released and available on Maven central
>> >>> > >> > >> repo
>> >>> > >> > >> - Camel 2.8.1 has been released and available on Maven
>> >>> > >> > >> central repo
>> >>> > >> > >> - ActiveMQ 5.5.0 is available
>> >>> > >> > >> - Karaf 2.2.2 is available
>> >>> > >> > >>
>> >>> > >> > >> I think that we are ready for the ServiceMix 4.4 release.
>> >>> > >> > >>
>> >>> > >> > >> As discussed before, the releases will be performed in a
>> >>> > >> > >> row, it
>> >>> > >> > >> means:
>> >>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix Utils 1.5.0
>> >>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix Components 2011.02
>> >>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix NMR 1.5.0
>> >>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix (Features) 4.4.0
>> >>> > >> > >>
>> >>> > >> > >> and in a second row:
>> >>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix 3.4
>> >>> > >> > >>
>> >>> > >> > >> I guess that the following Jiras should be fixed before
>> >>> > >> > >> release:
>> >>> > >> > >> - SMX4-939
>> >>> > >> > >> - SMX4-916
>> >>> > >> > >> - SMX4-885
>> >>> > >> > >> - SMX4-884
>> >>> > >> > >> - SMX4NMR-269
>> >>> > >> > >>
>> >>> > >> > >> I will pick up some. It could be great if we can cut off the
>> >>> > >> > >> releases at
>> >>> > >> > >> the end of this week.
>> >>> > >> > >>
>> >>> > >> > >> WDYT ?
>> >>> > >> > >>
>> >>> > >> > >> Regards
>> >>> > >> > >> JB
>> >>> > >> > >> --
>> >>> > >> > >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> >>> > >> > >> jbonofre@apache.org
>> >>> > >> > >> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> >>> > >> > >> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > ------------------------------**---------------
>> >>> > >> > > Freeman Fang
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > FuseSource
>> >>> > >> > > Email:ffang@fusesource.com
>> >>> > >> > > Web: fusesource.com
>> >>> > >> > > Twitter: freemanfang
>> >>> > >> > > Blog: http://freemanfang.blogspot.**com
>> >>> > >> > > <http://freemanfang.blogspot.com>
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> --
>> >>> > >> Daniel Kulp
>> >>> > >> dkulp@apache.org
>> >>> > >> http://dankulp.com/blog
>> >>> > >> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>> >>> --
>> >>> Daniel Kulp
>> >>> dkulp@apache.org
>> >>> http://dankulp.com/blog
>> >>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
Re: Toward ServiceMix 4.4
Posted by Gert Vanthienen <ge...@gmail.com>.
Karolis,
The Camel 2.8.3 vote has been started today, so that will take a few more
days (if it passes) before that will be available. We should be able to
follow up with the ServiceMix release builds a few days after the Camel
release is out in the wild, so I'd expect a release vote somewhere next
week.
Regards,
Gert Vanthienen
------------------------
FuseSource
Web: http://fusesource.com
Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 8:35 AM, Karolis Petrauskas
<k....@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hello,
>
> When do you expect to release ServiceMix 4.4?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Karolis
>
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Gert Vanthienen
> <ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > L.S.,
> >
> >
> > So it looks like both the CXF and Camel community can help us out with a
> > quick fix release here, so let's make sure we're ready to follow up with
> our
> > ServiceMix 4.4.0 release batch as soon as those are done. We definitely
> owe
> > them an extra credit in the release announcement as well, imho ;)
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Gert Vanthienen
> > ------------------------
> > FuseSource
> > Web: http://fusesource.com
> > Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Gert Vanthienen
> > <ge...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >> L.S.,
> >>
> >>
> >> OK, so it looks like we have two options here:
> >> #1. Karaf 2.2.2, CXF 2.4.2, Camel 2.8.1 and Spring 3.0.5.RELEASE, all of
> >> which is available right now so we can start the release process any
> day now
> >> #2. Karaf 2.2.4, CXF 2.4.4 and/or CXF 2.5.0 and a matching Camel
> release -
> >> this would mean we're waiting for a few more weeks again until the CXF
> and
> >> Camel release are done
> >>
> >> Based on Dan's last mail, I'll ping the camel dev list to see if they
> have
> >> some bandwidth to do a quick Camel 2.8.3 release after the CXF 2.4.4
> release
> >> is done - if there's a way to get things aligned in the next week or 2,
> it's
> >> probably well worth the wait. Otherwise, I'd suggest we go with #1 and
> plan
> >> for a follow-up release once Camel 2.9.0 is out.
> >>
> >> In the meanwhile, let's try to work with the Karaf team to figure out a
> >> solution for some of these dependency alignment issues we're facing
> (e.g.
> >> with the references to other features.xml files) to ensure we don't
> have to
> >> do this exercise every time again. If we could get the features
> >> cross-referencing issue resolved and make the features-maven-plugin a
> bit
> >> more version-aware, we should be able to get things out way quicker than
> >> what we're doing now... FYI - the thread for that discussion is at
> >> http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/Features-td3423534.html
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Gert Vanthienen
> >> ------------------------
> >> FuseSource
> >> Web: http://fusesource.com
> >> Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 1:25 PM, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Wednesday, October 26, 2011 12:11:32 PM Gert Vanthienen wrote:
> >>> > L.S.,
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Unless someone sees a real issue in the inconvenience of having the
> two
> >>> CXF
> >>> > features URLs in the assembly, I'm guessing we're going for Karaf
> >>> 2.2.4/CXF
> >>> > 2.4.4/Spring 3.0.6.RELEASE/... here for ServiceMix 4.4. I'll start
> >>> updating
> >>> > the POMs again to bump versions.
> >>> >
> >>> > BTW, I also understand the Camel community is planning to do a Camel
> >>> 2.9.0
> >>> > release somewhere in the next few days -
> >>>
> >>> It's only a 2.9.0-RC1, not a full 2.9.0 release. That's likely a
> couple
> >>> weeks away. I'm actually hoping to get 2.9.0 on CXF 2.5.0 by then.
> >>>
> >>> Dan
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> > would it be worth waiting for that
> >>> > one too (and perhaps we can ask them to consider upgrading to CXF
> 2.4.4
> >>> as
> >>> > well, that the entire universe is back in line)?
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Regards,
> >>> >
> >>> > Gert Vanthienen
> >>> > ------------------------
> >>> > FuseSource
> >>> > Web: http://fusesource.com
> >>> > Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Gert Vanthienen <
> >>> gert.vanthienen@gmail.com
> >>> > > wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > L.S.,
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Thanks for pointing that out! It's good to know that the CXF
> >>> community
> >>> > > can facilitate those quick fix releases if necessary. By all
> means,
> >>> if
> >>> > > you or any of the other guys has some bandwidth to do the extra
> >>> > > release, that would obviously be great. I guess the 'quick fix'
> that
> >>> > > Freeman mentioned became the real solution then...
> >>> > >
> >>> > > I just gave things a quick try here and just upgrading to CXF
> >>> > > 2.4.4-SNAPSHOT does seem to work out fine for the most part. There
> >>> are
> >>> > > some test failures in some of the itests, but those may well be
> >>> > > something I missed in my attempt to quickly test this. Other than
> >>> > > that, the resulting kit does seem to work fine - it does have
> multiple
> >>> > > versions of the CXF features descriptor installed because the Camel
> >>> > > descriptor still points at the old version (cfr. one of the issues
> >>> that
> >>> > > came up in the 'Features' thread earlier on).
> >>> > >
> >>> > > As far as I am concerned, this is just a minor inconvenience
> compared
> >>> to
> >>> > > the possible benefit of being able to upgrade to more recent fix
> >>> > > versions of almost anything else, so if the offer to provide a CXF
> >>> > > 2.4.4 fix release still stands, we'd highly appreciate that.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > (my apologies for the annoyance - it was in no way intentional, in
> >>> > > ServiceMix-land we always have to wait for the entire universe to
> >>> align
> >>> > > to do a release - fancy a Belgian beer or some chocolates some day
> to
> >>> > > make up for it ? ;)).
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Regards,
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Gert Vanthienen
> >>> > > ------------------------
> >>> > > FuseSource
> >>> > > Web: http://fusesource.com
> >>> > > Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
> >>> > >
> >>> > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > >> I just want to point out that I find it slightly "annoying" that,
> >>> > >> throughout
> >>> > >> this discussion, not one person has even asked on the CXF lists
> what
> >>> > >> it
> >>> > >> would
> >>> > >> take to get a 2.4.4 release out that fixes the issue. CXF is
> likely
> >>> > >> the community that would be MOST willing to get releases out to
> fix
> >>> > >> issues, it's
> >>> > >> just a matter of asking. It's been done for Geronimo. It's been
> >>> done
> >>> > >> for JBoss. etc....
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> I'm planning on doing the CXF 2.5.0 builds later this week or
> early
> >>> > >> next
> >>> > >> week
> >>> > >> (as discussed on dev@cxf earlier this month). Doing the 2.4.4
> >>> > >> release
> >>> > >> at the
> >>> > >> same time is not a big deal. We could have done one sooner if
> >>> someone
> >>> > >> would
> >>> > >> have asked. For that matter, Freeman, Guillaume, Willem, etc..
> >>> > >> could
> >>> > >> have
> >>> > >> easily started a CXF release. Unlike smx releases, CXF releases
> are
> >>> > >> fairly
> >>> > >> quick and easy. Mostly painless. :-) And documented:
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> http://cxf.apache.org/release-management.html
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> Dan
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> On Monday, October 24, 2011 11:54:23 AM Gert Vanthienen wrote:
> >>> > >> > Hey Freeman,
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> > I missed the remark that we're stuck on the backlevel versions -
> >>> > >> > I'll
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> make
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> > the necessary corrections to get things on these versions again.
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> > FWIW, I do think we have to figure out a way to improve features
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> descriptors
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> > to avoid being stuck on entire set of backlevel artifacts just
> >>> > >> > because
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> of
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> > one issue in one of the dependencies. There should be no
> >>> > >> > technical
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> reason
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> > why we can't upgrade to Spring 3.0.6.RELEASE because of an issue
> >>> > >> > in CXF 2.4.2 in my mind - shouldn't OSGi version ranges allow us
> >>> > >> > to just do>>
> >>> > >> these
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> > little upgrades without breaking everything else?
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> > Regards,
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> > Gert Vanthienen
> >>> > >> > ------------------------
> >>> > >> > FuseSource
> >>> > >> > Web: http://fusesource.com
> >>> > >> > Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> > On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Freeman Fang
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> <fr...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >>> > >> > > Hi JB,
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> > > CXF 2.4.3 has a problem that the http-osgi transport can't
> >>> > >> > > work with
> >>> > >> > > felix, also the cxf 2.4.3 use spring 3.0.6 which can't work
> >>> > >> > > with karaf 2.2.2, also camel 2.8.1 use cxf 2.4.2, for the
> >>> > >> > > reason above all, we should use CXF 2.4.2/Camel 2.8.1/Karaf
> >>> > >> > > 2.2.2 for SMX 4.4.
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> > > Btw, I just revert for components trunk so that we still use
> >>> > >> > > cxf
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> 2.4.2.
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> > > Regards
> >>> > >> > > Freeman
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> > > On 2011-10-17, at 下午5:24, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> >>> > >> > > Hi all,
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> > >> All required dependencies are now available to ServiceMix
> >>> > >> > >> 4.4:
> >>> > >> > >> - CXF 2.4.3 has been released and available on Maven central
> >>> > >> > >> repo
> >>> > >> > >> - Camel 2.8.1 has been released and available on Maven
> >>> > >> > >> central repo
> >>> > >> > >> - ActiveMQ 5.5.0 is available
> >>> > >> > >> - Karaf 2.2.2 is available
> >>> > >> > >>
> >>> > >> > >> I think that we are ready for the ServiceMix 4.4 release.
> >>> > >> > >>
> >>> > >> > >> As discussed before, the releases will be performed in a
> >>> > >> > >> row, it
> >>> > >> > >> means:
> >>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix Utils 1.5.0
> >>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix Components 2011.02
> >>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix NMR 1.5.0
> >>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix (Features) 4.4.0
> >>> > >> > >>
> >>> > >> > >> and in a second row:
> >>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix 3.4
> >>> > >> > >>
> >>> > >> > >> I guess that the following Jiras should be fixed before
> >>> > >> > >> release:
> >>> > >> > >> - SMX4-939
> >>> > >> > >> - SMX4-916
> >>> > >> > >> - SMX4-885
> >>> > >> > >> - SMX4-884
> >>> > >> > >> - SMX4NMR-269
> >>> > >> > >>
> >>> > >> > >> I will pick up some. It could be great if we can cut off the
> >>> > >> > >> releases at
> >>> > >> > >> the end of this week.
> >>> > >> > >>
> >>> > >> > >> WDYT ?
> >>> > >> > >>
> >>> > >> > >> Regards
> >>> > >> > >> JB
> >>> > >> > >> --
> >>> > >> > >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> >>> > >> > >> jbonofre@apache.org
> >>> > >> > >> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> >>> > >> > >> Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> > > ------------------------------**---------------
> >>> > >> > > Freeman Fang
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> > > FuseSource
> >>> > >> > > Email:ffang@fusesource.com
> >>> > >> > > Web: fusesource.com
> >>> > >> > > Twitter: freemanfang
> >>> > >> > > Blog: http://freemanfang.blogspot.**com
> >>> > >> > > <http://freemanfang.blogspot.com>
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> --
> >>> > >> Daniel Kulp
> >>> > >> dkulp@apache.org
> >>> > >> http://dankulp.com/blog
> >>> > >> Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >>> --
> >>> Daniel Kulp
> >>> dkulp@apache.org
> >>> http://dankulp.com/blog
> >>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>