You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@bigtop.apache.org by Andrew Bayer <an...@gmail.com> on 2011/09/01 00:18:46 UTC
Roadmap for 0.2.0-incubating
So what do we need/want to do for 0.2.0-incubating? Here's my first round of
suggestions (which are up on the wiki at
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/BIGTOP/Release+0.2.0-incubating+Roadmapas
well):
* Official designation of supported platforms.
* Removal of Java package dependencies.
* Cleanup/reorganization of source, package renames, etc.
* As part of release, make sure itest gets released to Maven repo.
* Automated testing of at least package existence/installation for all
packages on all supported platforms (on [http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/]
for now).
* Fixing of all bugs marked for 0.2.0 on JIRA ([see here|
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+BIGTOP+AND+resolution+%3D+Unresolved+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%220.2.0%22+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC
])
* Some documentation - at the very least, how to build, how to install once
you've built.
* Ideally, some sort of distribution method for the convenience artifacts,
even if we can't do that via ASF infrastructure.
Anyone else have thoughts?
A.
Re: Roadmap for 0.2.0-incubating
Posted by Bruno Mahé <bm...@apache.org>.
We still need to finish the discussion about it.
On 09/01/2011 11:37 AM, Andrew Bayer wrote:
> Forgot something - we also need to get some sort of bigtop identifier into
> our packages. Opening a bug for that now.
>
> A.
>
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Andrew Bayer <an...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> So what do we need/want to do for 0.2.0-incubating? Here's my first round
>> of suggestions (which are up on the wiki at
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/BIGTOP/Release+0.2.0-incubating+Roadmapas well):
>>
>> * Official designation of supported platforms.
>> * Removal of Java package dependencies.
>> * Cleanup/reorganization of source, package renames, etc.
>> * As part of release, make sure itest gets released to Maven repo.
>> * Automated testing of at least package existence/installation for all
>> packages on all supported platforms (on [
>> http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/] for now).
>> * Fixing of all bugs marked for 0.2.0 on JIRA ([see here|
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+BIGTOP+AND+resolution+%3D+Unresolved+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%220.2.0%22+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC
>> ])
>> * Some documentation - at the very least, how to build, how to install once
>> you've built.
>> * Ideally, some sort of distribution method for the convenience artifacts,
>> even if we can't do that via ASF infrastructure.
>>
>> Anyone else have thoughts?
>>
>> A.
>>
Re: Roadmap for 0.2.0-incubating
Posted by Andrew Bayer <an...@gmail.com>.
Forgot something - we also need to get some sort of bigtop identifier into
our packages. Opening a bug for that now.
A.
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Andrew Bayer <an...@gmail.com>wrote:
> So what do we need/want to do for 0.2.0-incubating? Here's my first round
> of suggestions (which are up on the wiki at
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/BIGTOP/Release+0.2.0-incubating+Roadmapas well):
>
> * Official designation of supported platforms.
> * Removal of Java package dependencies.
> * Cleanup/reorganization of source, package renames, etc.
> * As part of release, make sure itest gets released to Maven repo.
> * Automated testing of at least package existence/installation for all
> packages on all supported platforms (on [
> http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/] for now).
> * Fixing of all bugs marked for 0.2.0 on JIRA ([see here|
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+BIGTOP+AND+resolution+%3D+Unresolved+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%220.2.0%22+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC
> ])
> * Some documentation - at the very least, how to build, how to install once
> you've built.
> * Ideally, some sort of distribution method for the convenience artifacts,
> even if we can't do that via ASF infrastructure.
>
> Anyone else have thoughts?
>
> A.
>