You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@servicemix.apache.org by Gert Vanthienen <ge...@gmail.com> on 2009/11/30 15:58:20 UTC
Skipping a version of the archetypes?
L.S.,
I just realized the current version of the archetypes is still
2009.01-SNAPSHOT -- it looks like we never released the archetypes
after our last 3.3.1 and 4.0.0 release. As soon as Camel 2.1 is out,
we should be ready to go for components 2009.02 and I think it would
make more sense to have a matching archetypes version of 2009.02 at
that point as well. My main question is: should we just skip the
archetypes version 2009.01 and release 2009.02 as soon as the
components' release is out? Or should we go ahead now and release
archetypes 2009.01 before we do the next release of components?
I wouldn't mind doing the extra release if that's what we choose, but
if we don't think it is a useful exercise at this time any more with
the next version coming up soon, it might not be worth investing the
time/effort.
Regards,
Gert Vanthienen
------------------------
Open Source SOA: http://fusesource.com
Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
Re: Skipping a version of the archetypes?
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
Hi Charles,
It makes sense. Providing OSGi ready archetypes for SMX4 can help the
users. I propose to create the corresponding jira if the team are OK
with that.
Regards
JB
Charles Moulliard wrote:
> Additional point about archetype.
>
> I propose that we create a new directory for the archetype which are
> specific for platform OSGI and of course for ServiceMix 4. This folder can
> contain the following archetypes :
>
> - osgi-features = maven project + xml features file
> - osgi-camel-spring
> - osgi-camel-blueprint (when camel-blueprint will be ready)
> - osgi-pojo-spring
> - osgi-servicemix-project = parent pom containing list of modules to be
> installed in maven repo + dependencies definition + maven-bundle-plugin
> definition
> - osgi-config-spring = maven project + src/main/resources/META-INF/spring
> (could be used to place spring activemq.xml config file, ....)
>
> For JBI, clarification is requested as normally a JBI project is packaged as
> a collection of jar/zip in sa zip file + jbi/config.xml and thus is slighty
> different from OSGI bundles philosophy.
>
> Regards,
>
> Charles Moulliard
> Senior Enterprise Architect
> Apache Camel Committer
>
> *****************************
> blog : http://cmoulliard.blogspot.com
> twitter : http://twitter.com/cmoulliard
> Linkedlin : http://www.linkedin.com/in/charlesmoulliard
>
> Apache Camel Group :
> http://www.linkedin.com/groups?home=&gid=2447439&trk=anet_ug_hm
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 8:48 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>wrote:
>
>> Hi Gert,
>>
>> I think it's better to release archetpye 2009.01 before upgrading to
>> 2009.02. As the 2009.01 components have been released, it's logical to link
>> the archetype. Else, I'm afraid that the users are confused.
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>>
>>> L.S.,
>>>
>>> I just realized the current version of the archetypes is still
>>> 2009.01-SNAPSHOT -- it looks like we never released the archetypes
>>> after our last 3.3.1 and 4.0.0 release. As soon as Camel 2.1 is out,
>>> we should be ready to go for components 2009.02 and I think it would
>>> make more sense to have a matching archetypes version of 2009.02 at
>>> that point as well. My main question is: should we just skip the
>>> archetypes version 2009.01 and release 2009.02 as soon as the
>>> components' release is out? Or should we go ahead now and release
>>> archetypes 2009.01 before we do the next release of components?
>>>
>>> I wouldn't mind doing the extra release if that's what we choose, but
>>> if we don't think it is a useful exercise at this time any more with
>>> the next version coming up soon, it might not be worth investing the
>>> time/effort.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Gert Vanthienen
>>> ------------------------
>>> Open Source SOA: http://fusesource.com
>>> Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>>>
>
Re: Skipping a version of the archetypes?
Posted by Charles Moulliard <cm...@gmail.com>.
Additional point about archetype.
I propose that we create a new directory for the archetype which are
specific for platform OSGI and of course for ServiceMix 4. This folder can
contain the following archetypes :
- osgi-features = maven project + xml features file
- osgi-camel-spring
- osgi-camel-blueprint (when camel-blueprint will be ready)
- osgi-pojo-spring
- osgi-servicemix-project = parent pom containing list of modules to be
installed in maven repo + dependencies definition + maven-bundle-plugin
definition
- osgi-config-spring = maven project + src/main/resources/META-INF/spring
(could be used to place spring activemq.xml config file, ....)
For JBI, clarification is requested as normally a JBI project is packaged as
a collection of jar/zip in sa zip file + jbi/config.xml and thus is slighty
different from OSGI bundles philosophy.
Regards,
Charles Moulliard
Senior Enterprise Architect
Apache Camel Committer
*****************************
blog : http://cmoulliard.blogspot.com
twitter : http://twitter.com/cmoulliard
Linkedlin : http://www.linkedin.com/in/charlesmoulliard
Apache Camel Group :
http://www.linkedin.com/groups?home=&gid=2447439&trk=anet_ug_hm
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 8:48 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>wrote:
> Hi Gert,
>
> I think it's better to release archetpye 2009.01 before upgrading to
> 2009.02. As the 2009.01 components have been released, it's logical to link
> the archetype. Else, I'm afraid that the users are confused.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>
>> L.S.,
>>
>> I just realized the current version of the archetypes is still
>> 2009.01-SNAPSHOT -- it looks like we never released the archetypes
>> after our last 3.3.1 and 4.0.0 release. As soon as Camel 2.1 is out,
>> we should be ready to go for components 2009.02 and I think it would
>> make more sense to have a matching archetypes version of 2009.02 at
>> that point as well. My main question is: should we just skip the
>> archetypes version 2009.01 and release 2009.02 as soon as the
>> components' release is out? Or should we go ahead now and release
>> archetypes 2009.01 before we do the next release of components?
>>
>> I wouldn't mind doing the extra release if that's what we choose, but
>> if we don't think it is a useful exercise at this time any more with
>> the next version coming up soon, it might not be worth investing the
>> time/effort.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Gert Vanthienen
>> ------------------------
>> Open Source SOA: http://fusesource.com
>> Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>>
>
Re: Skipping a version of the archetypes?
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
Hi Gert,
I think it's better to release archetpye 2009.01 before upgrading to
2009.02. As the 2009.01 components have been released, it's logical to
link the archetype. Else, I'm afraid that the users are confused.
Regards
JB
Gert Vanthienen wrote:
> L.S.,
>
> I just realized the current version of the archetypes is still
> 2009.01-SNAPSHOT -- it looks like we never released the archetypes
> after our last 3.3.1 and 4.0.0 release. As soon as Camel 2.1 is out,
> we should be ready to go for components 2009.02 and I think it would
> make more sense to have a matching archetypes version of 2009.02 at
> that point as well. My main question is: should we just skip the
> archetypes version 2009.01 and release 2009.02 as soon as the
> components' release is out? Or should we go ahead now and release
> archetypes 2009.01 before we do the next release of components?
>
> I wouldn't mind doing the extra release if that's what we choose, but
> if we don't think it is a useful exercise at this time any more with
> the next version coming up soon, it might not be worth investing the
> time/effort.
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert Vanthienen
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA: http://fusesource.com
> Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
Re: Skipping a version of the archetypes?
Posted by Gert Vanthienen <ge...@gmail.com>.
Freeman,
Yeah, the only reason I would consider releasing the current 2009.01
set of archetypes would be to have a set of archetypes for working
with e.g. Camel 1.6 and CXF 2.0.x in ServiceMix 3.3.1.
I think it would probably be more consistent if the archetypes version
would be bumped to 2009.02 as well when we release that version of the
components (next week, when Camel 2.1 is out) to avoid even more
confusion with the different versions we use in our subprojects.
Regards,
Gert Vanthienen
------------------------
Open Source SOA: http://fusesource.com
Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
2009/12/1 Freeman Fang <fr...@gmail.com>:
> Hi Gert,
>
> +1 for releasing archetypes 2009.02 directly with components 2009.02.
>
> Or maybe we needn't keep same version between archetypes and components as
> they are separated project now, which means we might release archetypes
> 2009.01 directly with components 2009.02.
>
> Best Regards
> Freeman
>
> On 2009-11-30, at 下午10:58, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>
>> L.S.,
>>
>> I just realized the current version of the archetypes is still
>> 2009.01-SNAPSHOT -- it looks like we never released the archetypes
>> after our last 3.3.1 and 4.0.0 release. As soon as Camel 2.1 is out,
>> we should be ready to go for components 2009.02 and I think it would
>> make more sense to have a matching archetypes version of 2009.02 at
>> that point as well. My main question is: should we just skip the
>> archetypes version 2009.01 and release 2009.02 as soon as the
>> components' release is out? Or should we go ahead now and release
>> archetypes 2009.01 before we do the next release of components?
>>
>> I wouldn't mind doing the extra release if that's what we choose, but
>> if we don't think it is a useful exercise at this time any more with
>> the next version coming up soon, it might not be worth investing the
>> time/effort.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Gert Vanthienen
>> ------------------------
>> Open Source SOA: http://fusesource.com
>> Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>
>
> --
> Freeman Fang
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA: http://fusesource.com
>
>
Re: Skipping a version of the archetypes?
Posted by Freeman Fang <fr...@gmail.com>.
Hi Gert,
+1 for releasing archetypes 2009.02 directly with components 2009.02.
Or maybe we needn't keep same version between archetypes and
components as they are separated project now, which means we might
release archetypes 2009.01 directly with components 2009.02.
Best Regards
Freeman
On 2009-11-30, at 下午10:58, Gert Vanthienen wrote:
> L.S.,
>
> I just realized the current version of the archetypes is still
> 2009.01-SNAPSHOT -- it looks like we never released the archetypes
> after our last 3.3.1 and 4.0.0 release. As soon as Camel 2.1 is out,
> we should be ready to go for components 2009.02 and I think it would
> make more sense to have a matching archetypes version of 2009.02 at
> that point as well. My main question is: should we just skip the
> archetypes version 2009.01 and release 2009.02 as soon as the
> components' release is out? Or should we go ahead now and release
> archetypes 2009.01 before we do the next release of components?
>
> I wouldn't mind doing the extra release if that's what we choose, but
> if we don't think it is a useful exercise at this time any more with
> the next version coming up soon, it might not be worth investing the
> time/effort.
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert Vanthienen
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA: http://fusesource.com
> Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
--
Freeman Fang
------------------------
Open Source SOA: http://fusesource.com