You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@wookie.apache.org by Scott Wilson <sc...@gmail.com> on 2014/01/24 11:11:18 UTC
Roadmap for the future
Hi everyone,
I think its time we talked about the future direction for Wookie.
Right now we have pretty good stability of the current codebase, so much so that I'm personally loath to make any changes given how well it seems to perform.
However, I think we do want to make some pretty big changes, such as:
- moving from internal db storage to a service provider interface design
- replacing persistent widget instances with Shindig-style encrypted tokens
- moving from simple API keys to a more robust access token system for API access
- replacing DWR with another solution for data sharing
- moving from Ant to Maven for build and deployment
To move forward I think we need to make the current codebase a stable release branch, only updated for critical bugfixes and security updates, while we move onto working on a 2.0 release in trunk.
What do you think?
S
Re: Roadmap for the future
Posted by Paul Sharples <p....@bolton.ac.uk>.
On 26/01/2014 10:40, Scott Wilson wrote:
> On 24 Jan 2014, at 12:22, Paul Sharples wrote:
>
>> On 24/01/2014 10:11, Scott Wilson wrote:
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> I think its time we talked about the future direction for Wookie.
>>>
>>> Right now we have pretty good stability of the current codebase, so much so that I'm personally loath to make any changes given how well it seems to perform.
>>>
>>> However, I think we do want to make some pretty big changes, such as:
>>>
>>> - moving from internal db storage to a service provider interface design
>>> - replacing persistent widget instances with Shindig-style encrypted tokens
>>> - moving from simple API keys to a more robust access token system for API access
>>> - replacing DWR with another solution for data sharing
>>> - moving from Ant to Maven for build and deployment
>>>
>>> To move forward I think we need to make the current codebase a stable release branch, only updated for critical bugfixes and security updates, while we move onto working on a 2.0 release in trunk.
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>> +1 from me. I think this sounds like a sensible plan. Some of the things we have been discussing for a while (such as replacing DWR) are major changes, so a new v2.0 development branch seems the logical way forward, while keeping our current version alive.
> So do you think it would be better to have the stable version in trunk, and do 2.0x as a branch?
Sorry I wasn't clear. As long as we can still build/release the v1.0
codebase periodically wherever it is (branch or trunk) then I'm not
bothered either way. Unless there are some gotchas we've not thought
of, I can't think of any off hand.
Paul
>
>> Paul
>>
>>> S
Re: Roadmap for the future
Posted by Scott Wilson <sc...@gmail.com>.
On 24 Jan 2014, at 12:22, Paul Sharples wrote:
>
> On 24/01/2014 10:11, Scott Wilson wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I think its time we talked about the future direction for Wookie.
>>
>> Right now we have pretty good stability of the current codebase, so much so that I'm personally loath to make any changes given how well it seems to perform.
>>
>> However, I think we do want to make some pretty big changes, such as:
>>
>> - moving from internal db storage to a service provider interface design
>> - replacing persistent widget instances with Shindig-style encrypted tokens
>> - moving from simple API keys to a more robust access token system for API access
>> - replacing DWR with another solution for data sharing
>> - moving from Ant to Maven for build and deployment
>>
>> To move forward I think we need to make the current codebase a stable release branch, only updated for critical bugfixes and security updates, while we move onto working on a 2.0 release in trunk.
>>
>> What do you think?
>
> +1 from me. I think this sounds like a sensible plan. Some of the things we have been discussing for a while (such as replacing DWR) are major changes, so a new v2.0 development branch seems the logical way forward, while keeping our current version alive.
So do you think it would be better to have the stable version in trunk, and do 2.0x as a branch?
>
> Paul
>
>>
>> S
>
Re: Roadmap for the future
Posted by Paul Sharples <p....@bolton.ac.uk>.
On 24/01/2014 10:11, Scott Wilson wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I think its time we talked about the future direction for Wookie.
>
> Right now we have pretty good stability of the current codebase, so much so that I'm personally loath to make any changes given how well it seems to perform.
>
> However, I think we do want to make some pretty big changes, such as:
>
> - moving from internal db storage to a service provider interface design
> - replacing persistent widget instances with Shindig-style encrypted tokens
> - moving from simple API keys to a more robust access token system for API access
> - replacing DWR with another solution for data sharing
> - moving from Ant to Maven for build and deployment
>
> To move forward I think we need to make the current codebase a stable release branch, only updated for critical bugfixes and security updates, while we move onto working on a 2.0 release in trunk.
>
> What do you think?
+1 from me. I think this sounds like a sensible plan. Some of the
things we have been discussing for a while (such as replacing DWR) are
major changes, so a new v2.0 development branch seems the logical way
forward, while keeping our current version alive.
Paul
>
> S
Re: Roadmap for the future
Posted by Scott Wilson <sc...@gmail.com>.
Thanks everyone for the feedback on this. Given the positive response I'm going to go ahead and create a branch called "wookie-1.x".
The next steps would be:
- in the wookie-1.x branch, move the current revision from 0.15 to 1.0, and make a release
- in the trunk, start work on migrating to the new project/sub-projects structure and the Maven build process for 2.x.
Volunteers very welcome :)
S
On 29 Jan 2014, at 11:07, Steve Lee wrote:
>> On 01/24/2014 11:11 AM, Scott Wilson wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> I think its time we talked about the future direction for Wookie.
>>>
>>> Right now we have pretty good stability of the current codebase, so much
>>> so that I'm personally loath to make any changes given how well it seems to
>>> perform.
>>>
>>> However, I think we do want to make some pretty big changes, such as:
>>>
>>> - moving from internal db storage to a service provider interface design
>>> - replacing persistent widget instances with Shindig-style encrypted
>>> tokens
>>> - moving from simple API keys to a more robust access token system for
>>> API access
>>> - replacing DWR with another solution for data sharing
>>> - moving from Ant to Maven for build and deployment
>>>
>>> To move forward I think we need to make the current codebase a stable
>>> release branch, only updated for critical bugfixes and security updates,
>>> while we move onto working on a 2.0 release in trunk.
Re: Roadmap for the future
Posted by Steve Lee <st...@opendirective.com>.
+1
Steve
Autocomplete may have messed with my text
On 29 Jan 2014 11:03, "Ate Douma" <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
> On 01/24/2014 11:11 AM, Scott Wilson wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I think its time we talked about the future direction for Wookie.
>>
>> Right now we have pretty good stability of the current codebase, so much
>> so that I'm personally loath to make any changes given how well it seems to
>> perform.
>>
>> However, I think we do want to make some pretty big changes, such as:
>>
>> - moving from internal db storage to a service provider interface design
>> - replacing persistent widget instances with Shindig-style encrypted
>> tokens
>> - moving from simple API keys to a more robust access token system for
>> API access
>> - replacing DWR with another solution for data sharing
>> - moving from Ant to Maven for build and deployment
>>
>> To move forward I think we need to make the current codebase a stable
>> release branch, only updated for critical bugfixes and security updates,
>> while we move onto working on a 2.0 release in trunk.
>>
> +1
>
> Regards, Ate
>
>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> S
>>
>>
>
Re: Roadmap for the future
Posted by Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu>.
On 01/24/2014 11:11 AM, Scott Wilson wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I think its time we talked about the future direction for Wookie.
>
> Right now we have pretty good stability of the current codebase, so much so that I'm personally loath to make any changes given how well it seems to perform.
>
> However, I think we do want to make some pretty big changes, such as:
>
> - moving from internal db storage to a service provider interface design
> - replacing persistent widget instances with Shindig-style encrypted tokens
> - moving from simple API keys to a more robust access token system for API access
> - replacing DWR with another solution for data sharing
> - moving from Ant to Maven for build and deployment
>
> To move forward I think we need to make the current codebase a stable release branch, only updated for critical bugfixes and security updates, while we move onto working on a 2.0 release in trunk.
+1
Regards, Ate
>
> What do you think?
>
> S
>
Re: Roadmap for the future
Posted by Matt Franklin <m....@gmail.com>.
+1
Sent from a mobile device. Please excuse typos or brevity.
> On Jan 24, 2014, at 5:11, Scott Wilson <sc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I think its time we talked about the future direction for Wookie.
>
> Right now we have pretty good stability of the current codebase, so much so that I'm personally loath to make any changes given how well it seems to perform.
>
> However, I think we do want to make some pretty big changes, such as:
>
> - moving from internal db storage to a service provider interface design
> - replacing persistent widget instances with Shindig-style encrypted tokens
> - moving from simple API keys to a more robust access token system for API access
> - replacing DWR with another solution for data sharing
> - moving from Ant to Maven for build and deployment
>
> To move forward I think we need to make the current codebase a stable release branch, only updated for critical bugfixes and security updates, while we move onto working on a 2.0 release in trunk.
>
> What do you think?
>
> S