You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@forrest.apache.org by Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org> on 2005/09/30 13:18:24 UTC
A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Ferdinand Soethe wrote:
> Ross Gardler wrote:
>
>
>>>Are you gonna suggest the new release or should I?
>
>
>>http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=forrest-dev&m=111986901417286&w=2
>
>
> Sorry, I was a bit terse.
>
> What I meant to say is exactly along the lines that Ross quoted here
> (thanks, I'll add the title of Mc. Quickfind :-)).
>
> In other words: Now that we are back to a working trunk, let's start
> working on 0.8 M1 with the locationmap as the only feature.
We've done quite a bit of design work since that mail was written.
Here's what I propose now (almost the same, but considering what has
been said regarding the XHTML2 move):
0.8 - refactored sitemaps to utilise locationmap
0.9 - core as a plugin framework (all input/output code to plugins)
0.10 - views integration (which incorporate the move to XHTML2 subset)
1.0 - a big tidy up of JIRA issues
I see the 0.8 and 0.9 releases as being fairly rapid. They are not huge
jobs. It is the 0.10 work that will take lots of time (at least I
believe so).
We should do parallel development on the 0.8/0.9 releases and the
views/xhtml2 work (done in plugins, yes I changed my mind).
We keep trunk stable up until the 1.0-dev work. At this point we move
have a stable branch and a trunk for integration of views into core.
This is likely to end up in an unstable trunk for a time.
Ross
Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>.
David Crossley wrote:
> Ross Gardler wrote:
...
>>We should do parallel development on the 0.8/0.9 releases and the
>>views/xhtml2 work (done in plugins, yes I changed my mind).
>
>
> What caused you to change your mind?
>
> You almost had me convinced that doing the work
> in a development branch was the way to go.
To be totally honest, I didn't want another big discussion about how.
Thorsten is getting on with it as a plugin, thinking of his past (valid)
comments about too much discussion I am dropping it. If Thorsten wants
to move to a branch I will support that too.
If I find the time to get involved I may pick up the argument again, but
until then I'm happy to watch.
>>We keep trunk stable up until the 1.0-dev work. At this point we move
>>have a stable branch and a trunk for integration of views into core.
>>This is likely to end up in an unstable trunk for a time.
>
>
> Sorry, i cannot parse that paragraph.
> Did you mean to say "until the 0.10-dev work"?
Stable = "useable without having to jump through hoops"
However, you can completely disregard that paragraph - it is as good as
nonsense ;-)
Ross
Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>.
Ross Gardler wrote:
> Ferdinand Soethe wrote:
> >Ross Gardler wrote:
> >
> >>>Are you gonna suggest the new release or should I?
> >
> >>http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=forrest-dev&m=111986901417286&w=2
> >
> >Sorry, I was a bit terse.
> >
> >What I meant to say is exactly along the lines that Ross quoted here
> >(thanks, I'll add the title of Mc. Quickfind :-)).
> >
> >In other words: Now that we are back to a working trunk, let's start
> >working on 0.8 M1 with the locationmap as the only feature.
>
> We've done quite a bit of design work since that mail was written.
> Here's what I propose now (almost the same, but considering what has
> been said regarding the XHTML2 move):
>
> 0.8 - refactored sitemaps to utilise locationmap
> 0.9 - core as a plugin framework (all input/output code to plugins)
> 0.10 - views integration (which incorporate the move to XHTML2 subset)
> 1.0 - a big tidy up of JIRA issues
>
> I see the 0.8 and 0.9 releases as being fairly rapid. They are not huge
> jobs.
I like the idea of releasing in stages,
rather than a huge bang with many new or
changed functionality.
> It is the 0.10 work that will take lots of time (at least I
> believe so).
And then perhaps 0.11, 0.12 for bugfixing.
We need to be sure that 1.0 is robust.
> We should do parallel development on the 0.8/0.9 releases and the
> views/xhtml2 work (done in plugins, yes I changed my mind).
What caused you to change your mind?
You almost had me convinced that doing the work
in a development branch was the way to go.
> We keep trunk stable up until the 1.0-dev work. At this point we move
> have a stable branch and a trunk for integration of views into core.
> This is likely to end up in an unstable trunk for a time.
Sorry, i cannot parse that paragraph.
Did you mean to say "until the 0.10-dev work"?
Also i got confused about which bit is "stable"
and what stable means.
-David
Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>.
Ferdinand Soethe wrote:
I agree with everything you say re release early, release often (I have
a mail in my drafts folder I will send in a moment, I wanted to hear a
couple of other opinions before sending it).
> Btw: Please also re-consider Tim's excellent mail about doing the
> refactoring in smaller steps (Re: What does "XHTML2 as an
> internal document format" mean?)
Please read the IRC logs in which we discussed the implications of the
XHTML2 move and its interaction with views. Also see the mails leading
up to that discussion.
Conclusion of those present in the IRC session: It simply is not
sensible to do it in any smaller parts than those outlined at the end of
the session and being actioned right now by Thorsten.
Ross
Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Posted by "Gav...." <br...@brightontown.com.au>.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ferdinand Soethe" <fe...@apache.org>
To: <de...@forrest.apache.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2005 11:55 AM
Subject: Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
| What is different about a feature development in a branch
| that I (for lack of time or interest) _choose_ not to look at before
| it is proposed for integration and a concurrent development of several
| features (current situation) that a significant number of committers
| cannot follow anymore because they simple get lost in the complexity
| of several things happening at the same time.
|
| Please do realize that other people do not have your level of
| understanding of Forrest so carrying on at the level of
| complexity you will simply loose their input. And that in my view is
| no longer a matter of choice of their part so I'd clearly prefer the
| first way.
|
| --
| Ferdinand Soethe
The above statements may apply to me, I am trying so hard
to keep up and yet still I do not understand all that is
going on. I get to a stage where I get something working and
then it is outdated and I have to play catch up again.
With the recent influx of changes, I feel I am right back at the
beginning when I joined this list a few months ago. I have had
to step back and watch for these last two weeks whilst things
settle down and direction gets found.
I am still wanting to help and do my bit, but again I am lost
as to what to do and where to do it. I do not have a
particular itch, I have a general itch, to help this project in
some way that the project will find useful. I think I will
continue to watch & learn for a few more days until I
find my opening again.
Apologies for being quiet in the meantime.
Gav...
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.9/116 - Release Date: 30/09/2005
Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Posted by Ferdinand Soethe <fe...@apache.org>.
Thorsten Scherler wrote:
>> This was confirmed in response to my recent suggestions to create all
>> new features in separate branches that can be integrated (and
>> released) as soon as they are stable.
> Merging different branches that are have to go to the core are *not*
> possible, merging will be nearly impossible (too many possible
> conflicts).
So why was this decided in the first place? Is it really impossible or
does it just require a different approach?
> Besides the danger of:
> El jue, 29-09-2005 a las 10:46 +1000, David Crossley escribió:
>> Branches tend to become islands of lone development, ...
Hmm ... This point was made before and I didn't object. Now I do:
What is different about a feature development in a branch
that I (for lack of time or interest) _choose_ not to look at before
it is proposed for integration and a concurrent development of several
features (current situation) that a significant number of committers
cannot follow anymore because they simple get lost in the complexity
of several things happening at the same time.
Please do realize that other people do not have your level of
understanding of Forrest so carrying on at the level of
complexity you will simply loose their input. And that in my view is
no longer a matter of choice of their part so I'd clearly prefer the
first way.
--
Ferdinand Soethe
Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Posted by Thorsten Scherler <th...@apache.org>.
El vie, 30-09-2005 a las 16:40 +0200, Ferdinand Soethe escribió:
...
> This was confirmed in response to my recent suggestions to create all
> new features in separate branches that can be integrated (and
> released) as soon as they are stable.
Merging different branches that are have to go to the core are *not*
possible, merging will be nearly impossible (too many possible
conflicts).
Besides the danger of:
El jue, 29-09-2005 a las 10:46 +1000, David Crossley escribió:
> Branches tend to become islands of lone development, ...
salu2
--
thorsten
"Together we stand, divided we fall!"
Hey you (Pink Floyd)
Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Posted by Ferdinand Soethe <fe...@apache.org>.
Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> Why do we want to release 0.8, now?
> I thought we said we need to refactor the whole lot but now we want
> again release partial work? We have ongoing discussions about opening
> new branches, doing the work in plugins, ...
We already have an agreement to do small releases more frequently.
This was confirmed in response to my recent suggestions to create all
new features in separate branches that can be integrated (and
released) as soon as they are stable.
Time to start doing this even though some new featured have not yet
been developed in branches (unfortunately).
Re: confusion
My personal reason for suggesting this release now is that I find the
parallel development of several features extremely hard to
follow, understand and participate in.
I'd much rather have a locationmap release on stable ground where I
can look at it, understand and document it, then move to the next new
feature.
Btw: Please also re-consider Tim's excellent mail about doing the
refactoring in smaller steps (Re: What does "XHTML2 as an
internal document format" mean?)
--
Ferdinand Soethe
Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>.
Thorsten Scherler wrote:
>
> Why do we want to release 0.8, now?
One reason is that we agreed a while ago that
we should release more often. We also have an
improved Cocoon underneath. Features are easier
for users to grasp in small stages.
> I thought we said we need to refactor the whole lot but now we want
> again release partial work? We have ongoing discussions about opening
> new branches, doing the work in plugins, ...
Ongoing because it is obviously not decided how to
approach the work. Does it really matter that we
release partial work. It is clearly labelled as
being in development.
Sure we all want views/xhtml ready and released
ASAP, but the reality is that this will take time.
> Sorry, but it is starting to get real confusing.
>
> We need a final decision backup with a vote.
If we talk through the issues then we will have
a solid understanding of the best way to go
and a vote would be unnecessary.
If we do decide to make a 0.8 release now, then
we would need to take some time to improve the
current views documentation to emphasise that
if people want to work with "views" then they
need to not use the release code but jump into
the "0.x-dev" version.
-David
> -1 to release anything right now!
>
> salu2
> --
> thorsten
>
> "Together we stand, divided we fall!"
> Hey you (Pink Floyd)
Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>.
Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> Ross Gardler escribi??:
> > Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> > > Why do we want to release 0.8, now?
> >
> > release early, release often. This was discussed and agreed a month or
> > so ago.
>
> +1
>
> e.g. views reached their first stable version as prototype. Everything
> that is coming now make them again highly unstable (that is the reason
> why created the two new plugins). Now we can release them as first
> alternative to skins and state officially that the 0.8 release will be
> the last release that we recommend using skins.
Thanks. You now found the way forward.
> [ snip ]
> Being even more devils advocate let me ask if we want to release 08 as:
> >>0.8 - refactored sitemaps to utilise locationmap
> who is going to do this work?
Someone will. At least Ross, Ferdinand, and i are keen.
I will also help with documentation about project
codename "views".
-David
Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>.
Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> El vie, 30-09-2005 a las 17:08 +0100, Ross Gardler escribió:
>
>>Thorsten Scherler wrote:
>>
>>>Why do we want to release 0.8, now?
>>
>>release early, release often. This was discussed and agreed a month or
>>so ago.
>
>
> +1
...
>>Besides, the locationmap is, in itself, a very powerful tool that makes
>>it possible for Forrest to be used for the apache site-build proposal
>>(which is gathering pace again). see
>>http://people.apache.org/~rgardler/site-build/summary.html
>
>
> totally agree. but being devils advocate and seeing:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/forrest/trunk/main/webapp/locationmap.xml?view=markup
> makes me ask what do we want to release?
See below, with respect to the work that needs doing before a release.
> Being even more devils advocate let me ask if we want to release 08 as:
>
>>>0.8 - refactored sitemaps to utilise locationmap
>
> who is going to do this work?
See below, with respect to the work that needs doing before a release.
>>The only harm I see is a very long development schedule to the next
>>release which will hold up the release of the locationmap, which in turn
>>will hold up the release/development of some important (to me only?)
>>plugins (e.g. Daisy, Lenya, Amazon ECS) and attraction of users/devs to
>>Forrest (through Apache site-build)
>
>
> Totally agree but we really have not put too much work in refactoring
> the *whole* sitemaps to lm.
See below, with respect to the work that needs doing before a release.
>>>-1 to release anything right now!
>>
>>It's not right now it's once the sitemaps are refactored (which I will
>>do in the coming weeks).
>
>
> Actually that is the point, why you only? Refactoring the sitemaps can
> be done by *all* committers. There is no secrets to it.
That is correct. However, this is Open Source. It is done by those wo
have the itch. I have the itch, I will do it (and lets not forget that
Tim has done lots of preparatory work for me/us).
>>This is a *much* smaller job than the
>>XHTML2/views integration. Making core a plugin framework (0.9) paves the
>>way for integration of the views plugins (0.10) by cleaning up core even
>>more.
>
>
> Actually I will be able to in-cooperate views as soon the jxpath-1.2
> problem is solved. Thanks to Antonio, David et. al. that spend a lot of
> time solving the problem I think latest in 0.9 views are in the core
> and will make skins obsolete (can be earlier if we solve the
> linkrewritter/jxpath bug). I am right now as well looking into blocks
> and trying to make views a cocoon block.
Yes, my proposal is only an outline, things can come in a different
order if that, is what happens.
>>Does a 0.8 release prevent you from continuing work on the views stuff?
>>Is there really a need for a -1?
>
>
> A release can be done when I see the lm stuff. *Or* we refocus the
> release.
See above about the work still needing to be done and who has th time +
itch to do it.
> Like you stated they are other components that actually are
> justifying a release and we do not have to refactor all pipes for it.
True.
Ross
Re: devs do what we can (Was: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback))
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>.
You are correct. People need to do the work if they
have the energy to initiate a release. Other people
will follow and help. Same in every open source project.
And no-one needs to feel guilty for not helping.
When it happens it happens. If not then we will continue
on until the momentum gains.
-David
Ross Gardler wrote:
> I am making no cuts and no inline comments, it would be a crime to mess
> with the message Diwaker is sending here. Thank you, Diwaker, you are
> right on target.
>
> Ross
>
> ----------------------------------------
> Diwaker Gupta wrote:
> >>No offense to anyone but if somebody wants to release 0.8 as -
> >>refactored sitemaps to utilise locationmap, then we (or better this
> >>somebody) has to put some more work into it. It cannot be that we expect
> >>from the usual suspects that they now as well put more work into that
> >>part of forrest.
> >>
> >>Actually that is the point, why you only? Refactoring the sitemaps can
> >>be done by *all* committers. There is no secrets to it.
> >
> >I think this remark carries some negative connotation that bothers me.
> >I will try to be concise and objective in my statements so as to avoid
> >any confusion.
> >
> >I started using Forrest because it was a cool tool that fit my needs
> >perfectly. In using it I found some things that I needed that weren't
> >there and were not hard to fix, so I sent in the occasional patch. I
> >like living on the bleeding edge of cool software, so when views were
> >out I was quick to put them to test and I really liked the concept.
> >
> >With every project, there comes a time when the project sort of comes
> >of age. I think Forrest is nearing that time now. There are a lot of
> >ideas, discussions, community building up -- Forrest is trying to
> >define itself, which is fantastic. But like all good things, it will
> >take its time. I try to follow the discussions as and when I can, and
> >put in my thoughts if I have something to add. Otherwise I'm happy to
> >watch.
> >
> >I don't use Forrest at work. I don't get money out of Forrest related
> >work. For me, the only interest in Forrest is personal. I try and
> >contribute when I have the time and motivation, and it doesn't help if
> >I feel there is some 'pressure' or 'expection' when I don't.
> >
> >Like Ross said, this is open source. If someone has a itch, they
> >scratch it. At the same time however, for any good and large open
> >source project to succeed it usually takes more than a passing
> >interest and commitment on the part of atleast some of the developers.
> >Typically (there are always exceptions) people who have a more
> >concrete interest (work related, for instance) in the product will be
> >the stewards of large changes and I think that works out well.
> >
> >While I really appreciate all the hard work everyone puts into
> >Forrest, getting negative vibes about the "other" developers not
> >putting in enough effort doesn't help the project or the community.
> >People do what they want to do, and the community recognizes them for
> >it. If I am unable to contribute as much as the next developer, I
> >don't want to be judged for it, nor want other developers to feel bad
> >about it.
> >
> >I have great respect for the work that people are doing here, but I
> >feel bad if they think of themselves as the "usual suspects".
> >
> >Just my 2c.
> >--
> >Web/Blog/Gallery: floatingsun.net
> >
> >
devs do what we can (Was: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback))
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>.
Ross Gardler wrote:
> I am making no cuts and no inline comments, it would be a crime to mess
> with the message Diwaker is sending here. Thank you, Diwaker, you are
> right on target.
>
> Ross
>
> ----------------------------------------
> Diwaker Gupta wrote:
> >>No offense to anyone but if somebody wants to release 0.8 as -
> >>refactored sitemaps to utilise locationmap, then we (or better this
> >>somebody) has to put some more work into it. It cannot be that we expect
> >>from the usual suspects that they now as well put more work into that
> >>part of forrest.
> >>
> >>Actually that is the point, why you only? Refactoring the sitemaps can
> >>be done by *all* committers. There is no secrets to it.
> >
> >I think this remark carries some negative connotation that bothers me.
> >I will try to be concise and objective in my statements so as to avoid
> >any confusion.
> >
> >I started using Forrest because it was a cool tool that fit my needs
> >perfectly. In using it I found some things that I needed that weren't
> >there and were not hard to fix, so I sent in the occasional patch. I
> >like living on the bleeding edge of cool software, so when views were
> >out I was quick to put them to test and I really liked the concept.
> >
> >With every project, there comes a time when the project sort of comes
> >of age. I think Forrest is nearing that time now. There are a lot of
> >ideas, discussions, community building up -- Forrest is trying to
> >define itself, which is fantastic. But like all good things, it will
> >take its time. I try to follow the discussions as and when I can, and
> >put in my thoughts if I have something to add. Otherwise I'm happy to
> >watch.
> >
> >I don't use Forrest at work. I don't get money out of Forrest related
> >work. For me, the only interest in Forrest is personal. I try and
> >contribute when I have the time and motivation, and it doesn't help if
> >I feel there is some 'pressure' or 'expection' when I don't.
> >
> >Like Ross said, this is open source. If someone has a itch, they
> >scratch it. At the same time however, for any good and large open
> >source project to succeed it usually takes more than a passing
> >interest and commitment on the part of atleast some of the developers.
> >Typically (there are always exceptions) people who have a more
> >concrete interest (work related, for instance) in the product will be
> >the stewards of large changes and I think that works out well.
> >
> >While I really appreciate all the hard work everyone puts into
> >Forrest, getting negative vibes about the "other" developers not
> >putting in enough effort doesn't help the project or the community.
> >People do what they want to do, and the community recognizes them for
> >it. If I am unable to contribute as much as the next developer, I
> >don't want to be judged for it, nor want other developers to feel bad
> >about it.
> >
> >I have great respect for the work that people are doing here, but I
> >feel bad if they think of themselves as the "usual suspects".
> >
> >Just my 2c.
> >--
> >Web/Blog/Gallery: floatingsun.net
> >
> >
Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>.
Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> I never tried to produce pressure! I only said (with other words then
> Ross) if it is your itch to release then scratch it by helping to do the
> work involved.
>
> BTW forrest is for me as well only hobby.
>
> It seems anything that I say is taken differently then I indented, I am
> quite tiered of this and will try not to get involved in any such
> discussions anymore. It is to frustrating.
You are reacting, please calm down. We all know
what you intended. We trust you.
Look at it with a different view.
The things that came out of that discussion are
perhaps things that needed to be said. You were
the catalyst. Thanks.
By the way its a pity that you didn't reply to this
in the other thread. I tried to move that discussion
to a new subject, and separate this from the reasons
for doing a 0.8 release. Anyway a note for the archives:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=112813301300001
Re: devs do what we can
-David
Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Thorsten Scherler wrote:
...
> BTW forrest is for me as well only hobby.
Same here.
> It seems anything that I say is taken differently then I indented, I am
> quite tiered of this and will try not to get involved in any such
> discussions anymore. It is to frustrating.
Same here.
PS: I have not followed the discussion, I only read mail snippet.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Posted by "Gav...." <br...@brightontown.com.au>.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thorsten Scherler" <th...@apache.org>
To: <de...@forrest.apache.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2005 7:23 PM
Subject: Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
|I never tried to produce pressure! I only said (with other words then
| Ross) if it is your itch to release then scratch it by helping to do the
| work involved.
|
| BTW forrest is for me as well only hobby.
|
| It seems anything that I say is taken differently then I indented, I am
| quite tiered of this and will try not to get involved in any such
| discussions anymore. It is to frustrating.
|
Thorsten,
Your discussions are quite invaluable and I personally took no offense
from your comments. These discussions are I think a requirement
to the success and continued forward momentum of this project.
Please don't stop now.
Gav...
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.9/116 - Release Date: 30/09/2005
Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Posted by Thorsten Scherler <th...@apache.org>.
I never tried to produce pressure! I only said (with other words then
Ross) if it is your itch to release then scratch it by helping to do the
work involved.
BTW forrest is for me as well only hobby.
It seems anything that I say is taken differently then I indented, I am
quite tiered of this and will try not to get involved in any such
discussions anymore. It is to frustrating.
salu2
El sáb, 01-10-2005 a las 00:02 +0100, Ross Gardler escribió:
> I am making no cuts and no inline comments, it would be a crime to mess
> with the message Diwaker is sending here. Thank you, Diwaker, you are
> right on target.
>
> Ross
>
> Diwaker Gupta wrote:
> >>No offense to anyone but if somebody wants to release 0.8 as -
> >>refactored sitemaps to utilise locationmap, then we (or better this
> >>somebody) has to put some more work into it. It cannot be that we expect
> >>from the usual suspects that they now as well put more work into that
> >>part of forrest.
> >>
> >>Actually that is the point, why you only? Refactoring the sitemaps can
> >>be done by *all* committers. There is no secrets to it.
> >
> >
> > I think this remark carries some negative connotation that bothers me.
> > I will try to be concise and objective in my statements so as to avoid
> > any confusion.
> >
> > I started using Forrest because it was a cool tool that fit my needs
> > perfectly. In using it I found some things that I needed that weren't
> > there and were not hard to fix, so I sent in the occasional patch. I
> > like living on the bleeding edge of cool software, so when views were
> > out I was quick to put them to test and I really liked the concept.
> >
> > With every project, there comes a time when the project sort of comes
> > of age. I think Forrest is nearing that time now. There are a lot of
> > ideas, discussions, community building up -- Forrest is trying to
> > define itself, which is fantastic. But like all good things, it will
> > take its time. I try to follow the discussions as and when I can, and
> > put in my thoughts if I have something to add. Otherwise I'm happy to
> > watch.
> >
> > I don't use Forrest at work. I don't get money out of Forrest related
> > work. For me, the only interest in Forrest is personal. I try and
> > contribute when I have the time and motivation, and it doesn't help if
> > I feel there is some 'pressure' or 'expection' when I don't.
> >
> > Like Ross said, this is open source. If someone has a itch, they
> > scratch it. At the same time however, for any good and large open
> > source project to succeed it usually takes more than a passing
> > interest and commitment on the part of atleast some of the developers.
> > Typically (there are always exceptions) people who have a more
> > concrete interest (work related, for instance) in the product will be
> > the stewards of large changes and I think that works out well.
> >
> > While I really appreciate all the hard work everyone puts into
> > Forrest, getting negative vibes about the "other" developers not
> > putting in enough effort doesn't help the project or the community.
> > People do what they want to do, and the community recognizes them for
> > it. If I am unable to contribute as much as the next developer, I
> > don't want to be judged for it, nor want other developers to feel bad
> > about it.
> >
> > I have great respect for the work that people are doing here, but I
> > feel bad if they think of themselves as the "usual suspects".
> >
> > Just my 2c.
> > --
> > Web/Blog/Gallery: floatingsun.net
> >
> >
>
--
thorsten
"Together we stand, divided we fall!"
Hey you (Pink Floyd)
Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>.
I am making no cuts and no inline comments, it would be a crime to mess
with the message Diwaker is sending here. Thank you, Diwaker, you are
right on target.
Ross
Diwaker Gupta wrote:
>>No offense to anyone but if somebody wants to release 0.8 as -
>>refactored sitemaps to utilise locationmap, then we (or better this
>>somebody) has to put some more work into it. It cannot be that we expect
>>from the usual suspects that they now as well put more work into that
>>part of forrest.
>>
>>Actually that is the point, why you only? Refactoring the sitemaps can
>>be done by *all* committers. There is no secrets to it.
>
>
> I think this remark carries some negative connotation that bothers me.
> I will try to be concise and objective in my statements so as to avoid
> any confusion.
>
> I started using Forrest because it was a cool tool that fit my needs
> perfectly. In using it I found some things that I needed that weren't
> there and were not hard to fix, so I sent in the occasional patch. I
> like living on the bleeding edge of cool software, so when views were
> out I was quick to put them to test and I really liked the concept.
>
> With every project, there comes a time when the project sort of comes
> of age. I think Forrest is nearing that time now. There are a lot of
> ideas, discussions, community building up -- Forrest is trying to
> define itself, which is fantastic. But like all good things, it will
> take its time. I try to follow the discussions as and when I can, and
> put in my thoughts if I have something to add. Otherwise I'm happy to
> watch.
>
> I don't use Forrest at work. I don't get money out of Forrest related
> work. For me, the only interest in Forrest is personal. I try and
> contribute when I have the time and motivation, and it doesn't help if
> I feel there is some 'pressure' or 'expection' when I don't.
>
> Like Ross said, this is open source. If someone has a itch, they
> scratch it. At the same time however, for any good and large open
> source project to succeed it usually takes more than a passing
> interest and commitment on the part of atleast some of the developers.
> Typically (there are always exceptions) people who have a more
> concrete interest (work related, for instance) in the product will be
> the stewards of large changes and I think that works out well.
>
> While I really appreciate all the hard work everyone puts into
> Forrest, getting negative vibes about the "other" developers not
> putting in enough effort doesn't help the project or the community.
> People do what they want to do, and the community recognizes them for
> it. If I am unable to contribute as much as the next developer, I
> don't want to be judged for it, nor want other developers to feel bad
> about it.
>
> I have great respect for the work that people are doing here, but I
> feel bad if they think of themselves as the "usual suspects".
>
> Just my 2c.
> --
> Web/Blog/Gallery: floatingsun.net
>
>
Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Posted by Diwaker Gupta <di...@apache.org>.
> No offense to anyone but if somebody wants to release 0.8 as -
> refactored sitemaps to utilise locationmap, then we (or better this
> somebody) has to put some more work into it. It cannot be that we expect
> from the usual suspects that they now as well put more work into that
> part of forrest.
>
> Actually that is the point, why you only? Refactoring the sitemaps can
> be done by *all* committers. There is no secrets to it.
I think this remark carries some negative connotation that bothers me.
I will try to be concise and objective in my statements so as to avoid
any confusion.
I started using Forrest because it was a cool tool that fit my needs
perfectly. In using it I found some things that I needed that weren't
there and were not hard to fix, so I sent in the occasional patch. I
like living on the bleeding edge of cool software, so when views were
out I was quick to put them to test and I really liked the concept.
With every project, there comes a time when the project sort of comes
of age. I think Forrest is nearing that time now. There are a lot of
ideas, discussions, community building up -- Forrest is trying to
define itself, which is fantastic. But like all good things, it will
take its time. I try to follow the discussions as and when I can, and
put in my thoughts if I have something to add. Otherwise I'm happy to
watch.
I don't use Forrest at work. I don't get money out of Forrest related
work. For me, the only interest in Forrest is personal. I try and
contribute when I have the time and motivation, and it doesn't help if
I feel there is some 'pressure' or 'expection' when I don't.
Like Ross said, this is open source. If someone has a itch, they
scratch it. At the same time however, for any good and large open
source project to succeed it usually takes more than a passing
interest and commitment on the part of atleast some of the developers.
Typically (there are always exceptions) people who have a more
concrete interest (work related, for instance) in the product will be
the stewards of large changes and I think that works out well.
While I really appreciate all the hard work everyone puts into
Forrest, getting negative vibes about the "other" developers not
putting in enough effort doesn't help the project or the community.
People do what they want to do, and the community recognizes them for
it. If I am unable to contribute as much as the next developer, I
don't want to be judged for it, nor want other developers to feel bad
about it.
I have great respect for the work that people are doing here, but I
feel bad if they think of themselves as the "usual suspects".
Just my 2c.
--
Web/Blog/Gallery: floatingsun.net
Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Posted by Thorsten Scherler <th...@apache.org>.
El vie, 30-09-2005 a las 17:08 +0100, Ross Gardler escribió:
> Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> > Why do we want to release 0.8, now?
>
> release early, release often. This was discussed and agreed a month or
> so ago.
+1
e.g. views reached their first stable version as prototype. Everything
that is coming now make them again highly unstable (that is the reason
why created the two new plugins). Now we can release them as first
alternative to skins and state officially that the 0.8 release will be
the last release that we recommend using skins.
> > I thought we said we need to refactor the whole lot but now we want
> > again release partial work?
>
> Refactor the whole lot for a 1.0 release, yes, but there is nothing
> wrong with doing it in stages (in fact it is a good idea to do so,
> release early, release often)
Agree
>
> Besides, the locationmap is, in itself, a very powerful tool that makes
> it possible for Forrest to be used for the apache site-build proposal
> (which is gathering pace again). see
> http://people.apache.org/~rgardler/site-build/summary.html
totally agree. but being devils advocate and seeing:
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/forrest/trunk/main/webapp/locationmap.xml?view=markup
makes me ask what do we want to release?
Being even more devils advocate let me ask if we want to release 08 as:
>>0.8 - refactored sitemaps to utilise locationmap
who is going to do this work?
No offense to anyone but if somebody wants to release 0.8 as -
refactored sitemaps to utilise locationmap, then we (or better this
somebody) has to put some more work into it. It cannot be that we expect
from the usual suspects that they now as well put more work into that
part of forrest.
> > We have ongoing discussions about opening
> > new branches, doing the work in plugins, ...
> >
> > We need a final decision backup with a vote.
>
> Yes, that concerns me too, that is why I changed my mind about
> branch/plugins decision for the XHTML2 work. You are *doing* it in a
> plugin. My concern was only that it was you that suggested a branch on
> IRC. To be honest I don't care, as long as it gets done and since you
> are *doing* it I don't want to stand in your way - no need for
> discussion or vote unless someone sees harm.
Understood and thx. The rollback was necessary to let user and devs use
views again.
> The only harm I see is a very long development schedule to the next
> release which will hold up the release of the locationmap, which in turn
> will hold up the release/development of some important (to me only?)
> plugins (e.g. Daisy, Lenya, Amazon ECS) and attraction of users/devs to
> Forrest (through Apache site-build)
Totally agree but we really have not put too much work in refactoring
the *whole* sitemaps to lm.
> > -1 to release anything right now!
>
> It's not right now it's once the sitemaps are refactored (which I will
> do in the coming weeks).
Actually that is the point, why you only? Refactoring the sitemaps can
be done by *all* committers. There is no secrets to it.
> This is a *much* smaller job than the
> XHTML2/views integration. Making core a plugin framework (0.9) paves the
> way for integration of the views plugins (0.10) by cleaning up core even
> more.
Actually I will be able to in-cooperate views as soon the jxpath-1.2
problem is solved. Thanks to Antonio, David et. al. that spend a lot of
time solving the problem I think latest in 0.9 views are in the core
and will make skins obsolete (can be earlier if we solve the
linkrewritter/jxpath bug). I am right now as well looking into blocks
and trying to make views a cocoon block.
> Does a 0.8 release prevent you from continuing work on the views stuff?
> Is there really a need for a -1?
A release can be done when I see the lm stuff. *Or* we refocus the
release. Like you stated they are other components that actually are
justifying a release and we do not have to refactor all pipes for it.
> ---
>
> I did miss something out in the schedule though:
>
> >>0.8 - refactored sitemaps to utilise locationmap
> >>0.9 - core as a plugin framework (all input/output code to plugins)
> >>0.10 - views integration (which incorporate the move to XHTML2 subset)
>
> 0.11 - forrest as a Cocoon block (includes new config system)
That would be nice.
salu2
--
thorsten
"Together we stand, divided we fall!"
Hey you (Pink Floyd)
Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@apache.org>.
Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> Why do we want to release 0.8, now?
release early, release often. This was discussed and agreed a month or
so ago.
> I thought we said we need to refactor the whole lot but now we want
> again release partial work?
Refactor the whole lot for a 1.0 release, yes, but there is nothing
wrong with doing it in stages (in fact it is a good idea to do so,
release early, release often)
Besides, the locationmap is, in itself, a very powerful tool that makes
it possible for Forrest to be used for the apache site-build proposal
(which is gathering pace again). see
http://people.apache.org/~rgardler/site-build/summary.html
> We have ongoing discussions about opening
> new branches, doing the work in plugins, ...
>
> We need a final decision backup with a vote.
Yes, that concerns me too, that is why I changed my mind about
branch/plugins decision for the XHTML2 work. You are *doing* it in a
plugin. My concern was only that it was you that suggested a branch on
IRC. To be honest I don't care, as long as it gets done and since you
are *doing* it I don't want to stand in your way - no need for
discussion or vote unless someone sees harm.
The only harm I see is a very long development schedule to the next
release which will hold up the release of the locationmap, which in turn
will hold up the release/development of some important (to me only?)
plugins (e.g. Daisy, Lenya, Amazon ECS) and attraction of users/devs to
Forrest (through Apache site-build)
> -1 to release anything right now!
It's not right now it's once the sitemaps are refactored (which I will
do in the coming weeks). This is a *much* smaller job than the
XHTML2/views integration. Making core a plugin framework (0.9) paves the
way for integration of the views plugins (0.10) by cleaning up core even
more.
Does a 0.8 release prevent you from continuing work on the views stuff?
Is there really a need for a -1?
---
I did miss something out in the schedule though:
>>0.8 - refactored sitemaps to utilise locationmap
>>0.9 - core as a plugin framework (all input/output code to plugins)
>>0.10 - views integration (which incorporate the move to XHTML2 subset)
0.11 - forrest as a Cocoon block (includes new config system)
>>1.0 - a big tidy up of JIRA issues
>>
>>I see the 0.8 and 0.9 releases as being fairly rapid. They are not huge
>>jobs. It is the 0.10 work that will take lots of time (at least I
>>believe so).
>>
>>We should do parallel development on the 0.8/0.9 releases and the
>>views/xhtml2 work (done in plugins, yes I changed my mind).
>>
>>We keep trunk stable up until the 1.0-dev work. At this point we move
>>have a stable branch and a trunk for integration of views into core.
>>This is likely to end up in an unstable trunk for a time.
>>
>>Ross
Re: A 0.8 release? (was Re: [Proposal] rollback)
Posted by Thorsten Scherler <th...@apache.org>.
Why do we want to release 0.8, now?
I thought we said we need to refactor the whole lot but now we want
again release partial work? We have ongoing discussions about opening
new branches, doing the work in plugins, ...
Sorry, but it is starting to get real confusing.
We need a final decision backup with a vote.
-1 to release anything right now!
salu2
El vie, 30-09-2005 a las 12:18 +0100, Ross Gardler escribió:
> Ferdinand Soethe wrote:
> > Ross Gardler wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>Are you gonna suggest the new release or should I?
> >
> >
> >>http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=forrest-dev&m=111986901417286&w=2
> >
> >
> > Sorry, I was a bit terse.
> >
> > What I meant to say is exactly along the lines that Ross quoted here
> > (thanks, I'll add the title of Mc. Quickfind :-)).
> >
> > In other words: Now that we are back to a working trunk, let's start
> > working on 0.8 M1 with the locationmap as the only feature.
>
> We've done quite a bit of design work since that mail was written.
> Here's what I propose now (almost the same, but considering what has
> been said regarding the XHTML2 move):
>
> 0.8 - refactored sitemaps to utilise locationmap
> 0.9 - core as a plugin framework (all input/output code to plugins)
> 0.10 - views integration (which incorporate the move to XHTML2 subset)
> 1.0 - a big tidy up of JIRA issues
>
> I see the 0.8 and 0.9 releases as being fairly rapid. They are not huge
> jobs. It is the 0.10 work that will take lots of time (at least I
> believe so).
>
> We should do parallel development on the 0.8/0.9 releases and the
> views/xhtml2 work (done in plugins, yes I changed my mind).
>
> We keep trunk stable up until the 1.0-dev work. At this point we move
> have a stable branch and a trunk for integration of views into core.
> This is likely to end up in an unstable trunk for a time.
>
> Ross
--
thorsten
"Together we stand, divided we fall!"
Hey you (Pink Floyd)