You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org> on 2006/12/05 19:21:34 UTC
[DISCUSS] G 2.0 M1 Content
Given that we haven't created milestone releases for a while I wanted
to make sure that we had all the bases covered for G 2.0-M1. Here is
a list of things that I can think of and would like other's input on
what is required.
Should we use M<N>
------------------
Jason posted in another thread about how M<n> (I assume you were
referring to Milestones) might be confusing for post 1.0 releases. I
don't think its confusing as it represents a simple point in time
reference of a work in progress but not a full implementation (I
think that build would more appropriately be a beta). Alpha release
might be appropriate but I'm good with milestone. Other thoughts?
Documentation
-------------
Need the normal release notes to identify what works and what
doesn't. I was talking to Sachin and he indicated that WTP would
barf on most of the Java EE 5.0 stuff so that is a reasonable thing
to post here. Also, a description of what is included and not would
make sense as well.
Content
-------
At this point M1 would contain:
Java 1.5 as the base JDK
Tomcat and Jetty for Servlet 2.5, JSP 2.1 and Debugging support.
JTA 1.1
JSF (depending on where the MyFaces folks are at)
JSTL (I think Joe was working on this)
Once we get this together and we can run Daytrader 2.0-SNAPSHOT on it
I think we have a content ready milestone.
Timeline
--------
This is less important than the content. I suggested 12/22 since its
the Friday before the Christmas holiday. Personally it would feel
good to know we packaged up something and finished it this year
towards 2.0. There is a lot of small stuff we already have thats
almost done. We've been discussing release early and often so the
date is more of an artificial stake in the sand. If we don't get the
work done then we don't ship. It largely depends on completing what
goes into M1 rather than the date.
My personal pattern is to wait until the last minute to get something
done. I've done it through grade school, college and
professionally. A date motivates me more than a function as I can
polish things forever or put off the simple things until the last
minute (just ask my wife about the pictures that have been waiting to
be hung for months ;-P )
I think the other responses in the status thread are positive to make
this happen so hopefully this thread will help flush out the content.
Matt Hogstrom
matt@hogstrom.org
Re: [DISCUSS] G 2.0 M1 Content
Posted by Vamsavardhana Reddy <c1...@gmail.com>.
2.0 followed by 2.0-geronimo-developer :o)
--vamsi
On 12/6/06, Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 5, 2006, at 2:41 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>
> > On Dec 5, 2006, at 11:34 AM, Sachin Patel wrote:
> >> I don't see the confusion at all, as long as the M<n> is preceded
> >> by the final release version (ex. geronimo-2.0-M1).
> >
> > Yes, but already Matt is referring to "M1" with no 2.0 prefix.
> >
> > Anyways... I don't like it... but I don't have the energy to debate
> > it.
>
> My bad. I meant 2.0-M1...I'll correct that omission in the future.
> I now understand the confusion.
>
> What other suffix do you think would be appropriate? I don't care if
> its 2.0-frog1. Following an evolutionary theme we could have:
>
> 2.0-proteinStrand
> 2.0-singleCellOrganism
> 2.0-fish
> 2.0-frog
> 2.0-chimp
> 2.0-homosapien
> 2.0
>
> :)
>
>
> >
> > --jason
> >
>
> Matt Hogstrom
> matt@hogstrom.org
>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] G 2.0 M1 Content
Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com>.
eh... I think proteinStrand, chimp, frog is soooo much better Matt :-P
I just don't want to start hearing people talking about "m1" and
meaning "2.0-m1" compared to the first m1 of Geronimo.
I'm going to drop this now... my opinion has been noted... and now ye
all shall continue :-)
--jason
On Dec 5, 2006, at 12:35 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>
> On Dec 5, 2006, at 2:41 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>
>> On Dec 5, 2006, at 11:34 AM, Sachin Patel wrote:
>>> I don't see the confusion at all, as long as the M<n> is preceded
>>> by the final release version (ex. geronimo-2.0-M1).
>>
>> Yes, but already Matt is referring to "M1" with no 2.0 prefix.
>>
>> Anyways... I don't like it... but I don't have the energy to
>> debate it.
>
> My bad. I meant 2.0-M1...I'll correct that omission in the
> future. I now understand the confusion.
>
> What other suffix do you think would be appropriate? I don't care
> if its 2.0-frog1. Following an evolutionary theme we could have:
>
> 2.0-proteinStrand
> 2.0-singleCellOrganism
> 2.0-fish
> 2.0-frog
> 2.0-chimp
> 2.0-homosapien
> 2.0
>
> :)
>
>
>>
>> --jason
>>
>
> Matt Hogstrom
> matt@hogstrom.org
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] G 2.0 M1 Content
Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
On Dec 5, 2006, at 2:41 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
> On Dec 5, 2006, at 11:34 AM, Sachin Patel wrote:
>> I don't see the confusion at all, as long as the M<n> is preceded
>> by the final release version (ex. geronimo-2.0-M1).
>
> Yes, but already Matt is referring to "M1" with no 2.0 prefix.
>
> Anyways... I don't like it... but I don't have the energy to debate
> it.
My bad. I meant 2.0-M1...I'll correct that omission in the future.
I now understand the confusion.
What other suffix do you think would be appropriate? I don't care if
its 2.0-frog1. Following an evolutionary theme we could have:
2.0-proteinStrand
2.0-singleCellOrganism
2.0-fish
2.0-frog
2.0-chimp
2.0-homosapien
2.0
:)
>
> --jason
>
Matt Hogstrom
matt@hogstrom.org
Re: [DISCUSS] G 2.0 M1 Content
Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com>.
On Dec 5, 2006, at 11:34 AM, Sachin Patel wrote:
> I don't see the confusion at all, as long as the M<n> is preceded
> by the final release version (ex. geronimo-2.0-M1).
Yes, but already Matt is referring to "M1" with no 2.0 prefix.
Anyways... I don't like it... but I don't have the energy to debate it.
--jason
Re: [DISCUSS] G 2.0 M1 Content
Posted by Sachin Patel <sp...@gmail.com>.
I don't see the confusion at all, as long as the M<n> is preceded by
the final release version (ex. geronimo-2.0-M1).
On Dec 5, 2006, at 1:21 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> Should we use M<N>
> ------------------
> Jason posted in another thread about how M<n> (I assume you were
> referring to Milestones) might be confusing for post 1.0 releases.
> I don't think its confusing as it represents a simple point in time
> reference of a work in progress but not a full implementation (I
> think that build would more appropriately be a beta). Alpha
> release might be appropriate but I'm good with milestone. Other
> thoughts?
-sachin
Re: [DISCUSS] G 2.0 M1 Content
Posted by "Christopher M. Cardona" <ch...@gmail.com>.
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> Content
> -------
> At this point M1 would contain:
>
> Java 1.5 as the base JDK
> Tomcat and Jetty for Servlet 2.5, JSP 2.1 and Debugging support.
> JTA 1.1
> JSF (depending on where the MyFaces folks are at)
> JSTL (I think Joe was working on this)
>
> Once we get this together and we can run Daytrader 2.0-SNAPSHOT on it
> I think we have a content ready milestone.
Matt,
JavaMail 1.4 and JAF 1.1 work was done by Rick and I already published
the JavaMail specs, provider, mail jars to Apache snapshot repo. I'm
currently working on updating trunk to use JavaMail 1.4 and JAF 1.1. and
after this is done we need to test it and make sure it doesn't break
anything and we should be set. This should be done this week.
chris
Re: [DISCUSS] G 2.0 M1 Content
Posted by Hernan Cunico <hc...@gmail.com>.
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
...
> Should we use M<N>
> ------------------
I like Milestones better ( G2.0-M1 ) than Alpha/Beta schema.
>
> Documentation
> -------------
The Apache Geronimo v2.0 cwiki space is already available at cwiki.apache.org/geronimo. We could use it to hold all v2.0 specific info (release notes, release roadmaps, documentation itself, etc.)
>
> Content
> -------
We need this content on the wiki (and referenced from the Web site). I think it would help a features breakdown table grouped by Milestones.
>
> Timeline
> --------
> This is less important than the content. I suggested 12/22 since its
> the Friday before the Christmas holiday. Personally it would feel good
> to know we packaged up something and finished it this year towards 2.0.
Agree, with the holidays approaching is either on 12/22 or some time next year, hopefully in the first few months.
> There is a lot of small stuff we already have thats almost done. We've
We need to get that info in the "Milestone release roadmap" (let's give it a catchy name ;-) )
> been discussing release early and often so the date is more of an
> artificial stake in the sand. If we don't get the work done then we
> don't ship. It largely depends on completing what goes into M1 rather
> than the date.
>
...
>
>
> Matt Hogstrom
> matt@hogstrom.org
>
Cheers!
Hernan
Re: [DISCUSS] G 2.0 M1 Content
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>.
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> Should we use M<N>
> ------------------
> Jason posted in another thread about how M<n> (I assume you were
> referring to Milestones) might be confusing for post 1.0 releases. I
> don't think its confusing as it represents a simple point in time
> reference of a work in progress but not a full implementation (I think
> that build would more appropriately be a beta). Alpha release might be
> appropriate but I'm good with milestone. Other thoughts?
I find milestone more helpful than alpha or beta which I typically think
of as being mostly function complete releases (which is not true for
this initial delivery).
>
> Documentation
> -------------
> Need the normal release notes to identify what works and what doesn't.
> I was talking to Sachin and he indicated that WTP would barf on most of
> the Java EE 5.0 stuff so that is a reasonable thing to post here.
> Also, a description of what is included and not would make sense as well.
>
> Content
> -------
> At this point M1 would contain:
>
> Java 1.5 as the base JDK
> Tomcat and Jetty for Servlet 2.5, JSP 2.1 and Debugging support.
> JTA 1.1
> JSF (depending on where the MyFaces folks are at)
> JSTL (I think Joe was working on this)
Yes, as I mentioned on earlier appends I believe including JSTL 1.2 is
just a matter of including the library (which I'm still planning to pull
from Glassfish based on the recommendation from the jakarta team).
JSTL has pre-req on JSP 2.1
- Jetty 6 we have now is still using jsp 2.0 from jasper. I'm trying to
get my local build to use the jsp-2.1 that is produced by Jetty 6 (which
I think also includes Glassfish parts IIUC).
- Tomcat 6 - It looks like Paul is covering JSP 2.1 with his work.
If I get one of the containers working with JSP 2.1 then I can verify if
the JSTL is just a matter of dropping in the jar.
Joe
Re: [DISCUSS] G 2.0 M1 Content
Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com>.
On Dec 5, 2006, at 10:21 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> Should we use M<N>
> ------------------
> Jason posted in another thread about how M<n> (I assume you were
> referring to Milestones) might be confusing for post 1.0 releases.
> I don't think its confusing as it represents a simple point in time
> reference of a work in progress but not a full implementation (I
> think that build would more appropriately be a beta). Alpha
> release might be appropriate but I'm good with milestone. Other
> thoughts?
We have a history of using M1 syntax for releases and see no reason
to change that.
> Content
> -------
> At this point M1 would contain:
>
> Java 1.5 as the base JDK
> Tomcat and Jetty for Servlet 2.5, JSP 2.1 and Debugging support.
> JTA 1.1
> JSF (depending on where the MyFaces folks are at)
> JSTL (I think Joe was working on this)
>
> Once we get this together and we can run Daytrader 2.0-SNAPSHOT on
> it I think we have a content ready milestone.
We already have JPA but it is so cool we should mention it again :)
> Timeline
> --------
> This is less important than the content. I suggested 12/22 since
> its the Friday before the Christmas holiday. Personally it would
> feel good to know we packaged up something and finished it this
> year towards 2.0. There is a lot of small stuff we already have
> thats almost done. We've been discussing release early and often
> so the date is more of an artificial stake in the sand. If we
> don't get the work done then we don't ship. It largely depends on
> completing what goes into M1 rather than the date.
+1 Lets get'er done
-dain
Re: [DISCUSS] G 2.0 M1 Content
Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
Most excellent :)
On Dec 5, 2006, at 2:12 PM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:
>>
>> Content
>> -------
>> At this point M1 would contain:
>>
>> Java 1.5 as the base JDK
>> Tomcat and Jetty for Servlet 2.5, JSP 2.1 and Debugging support.
>> JTA 1.1
>> JSF (depending on where the MyFaces folks are at)
>> JSTL (I think Joe was working on this)
>>
> If there is interest, I could add j2ee management 1.1.
>
> Thanks
> Anita
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ______________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
> http://new.mail.yahoo.com
>
Matt Hogstrom
matt@hogstrom.org
Re: [DISCUSS] G 2.0 M1 Content
Posted by "Christopher M. Cardona" <ch...@gmail.com>.
Anita,
This sounds like an excellent plan! I'm getting the impression you've
done a lot of stuff already so please let me know what other missing
pieces you haven't covered so I can help.
Best wishes,
chris
anita kulshreshtha wrote:
> Chris,
> For 2.0-M1 I am planning to upgrade geronimo modules/configs to use
> 1.1 specs. I could ask Jacek to apply an openejb patch for us. We need
> to upgrade tranql also eventually.
>
> Thanks
> Anita
>
> --- "Christopher M. Cardona" <ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> anita kulshreshtha wrote:
>>
>>>> Content
>>>> -------
>>>> At this point M1 would contain:
>>>>
>>>> Java 1.5 as the base JDK
>>>> Tomcat and Jetty for Servlet 2.5, JSP 2.1 and Debugging support.
>>>> JTA 1.1
>>>> JSF (depending on where the MyFaces folks are at)
>>>> JSTL (I think Joe was working on this)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> If there is interest, I could add j2ee management 1.1.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Anita
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Anita,
>>
>> I also started looking at J2EE management work and I'm just wondering
>>
>> what you plan to include specifically in M1 release. I think we
>> should
>> coordinate this work so we don’t do the same thing.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> chris
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
>
>>> Do you Yahoo!?
>>> Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
>>> http://new.mail.yahoo.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Want to start your own business?
> Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.
> http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/r-index
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] G 2.0 M1 Content
Posted by "Christopher M. Cardona" <ch...@gmail.com>.
Sure. It's done.
chris
anita kulshreshtha wrote:
> Chris,
> If you are setup to publish the specs, could you please publish
> j2ee_management 1.1 spec.
>
> Thanks
> Anita
>
> --- anita kulshreshtha <a_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Chris,
>> For 2.0-M1 I am planning to upgrade geronimo modules/configs to
>> use
>> 1.1 specs. I could ask Jacek to apply an openejb patch for us. We
>> need
>> to upgrade tranql also eventually.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Anita
>>
>> --- "Christopher M. Cardona" <ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> anita kulshreshtha wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Content
>>>>> -------
>>>>> At this point M1 would contain:
>>>>>
>>>>> Java 1.5 as the base JDK
>>>>> Tomcat and Jetty for Servlet 2.5, JSP 2.1 and Debugging support.
>>>>> JTA 1.1
>>>>> JSF (depending on where the MyFaces folks are at)
>>>>> JSTL (I think Joe was working on this)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> If there is interest, I could add j2ee management 1.1.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Anita
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Anita,
>>>
>>> I also started looking at J2EE management work and I'm just
>>>
>> wondering
>>
>>> what you plan to include specifically in M1 release. I think we
>>> should
>>> coordinate this work so we don’t do the same thing.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> chris
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
>
>>>> Do you Yahoo!?
>>>> Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
>>>> http://new.mail.yahoo.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
>
>> Want to start your own business?
>> Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.
>> http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/r-index
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Yahoo! Music Unlimited
> Access over 1 million songs.
> http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] G 2.0 M1 Content
Posted by anita kulshreshtha <a_...@yahoo.com>.
Chris,
If you are setup to publish the specs, could you please publish
j2ee_management 1.1 spec.
Thanks
Anita
--- anita kulshreshtha <a_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Chris,
> For 2.0-M1 I am planning to upgrade geronimo modules/configs to
> use
> 1.1 specs. I could ask Jacek to apply an openejb patch for us. We
> need
> to upgrade tranql also eventually.
>
> Thanks
> Anita
>
> --- "Christopher M. Cardona" <ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > anita kulshreshtha wrote:
> > >> Content
> > >> -------
> > >> At this point M1 would contain:
> > >>
> > >> Java 1.5 as the base JDK
> > >> Tomcat and Jetty for Servlet 2.5, JSP 2.1 and Debugging support.
> > >> JTA 1.1
> > >> JSF (depending on where the MyFaces folks are at)
> > >> JSTL (I think Joe was working on this)
> > >>
> > >>
> > > If there is interest, I could add j2ee management 1.1.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Anita
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Anita,
> >
> > I also started looking at J2EE management work and I'm just
> wondering
> >
> > what you plan to include specifically in M1 release. I think we
> > should
> > coordinate this work so we dont do the same thing.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > chris
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
> > > http://new.mail.yahoo.com
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
> Want to start your own business?
> Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.
> http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/r-index
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Music Unlimited
Access over 1 million songs.
http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited
Re: [DISCUSS] G 2.0 M1 Content
Posted by anita kulshreshtha <a_...@yahoo.com>.
Chris,
For 2.0-M1 I am planning to upgrade geronimo modules/configs to use
1.1 specs. I could ask Jacek to apply an openejb patch for us. We need
to upgrade tranql also eventually.
Thanks
Anita
--- "Christopher M. Cardona" <ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> anita kulshreshtha wrote:
> >> Content
> >> -------
> >> At this point M1 would contain:
> >>
> >> Java 1.5 as the base JDK
> >> Tomcat and Jetty for Servlet 2.5, JSP 2.1 and Debugging support.
> >> JTA 1.1
> >> JSF (depending on where the MyFaces folks are at)
> >> JSTL (I think Joe was working on this)
> >>
> >>
> > If there is interest, I could add j2ee management 1.1.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Anita
> >
> >
>
> Anita,
>
> I also started looking at J2EE management work and I'm just wondering
>
> what you plan to include specifically in M1 release. I think we
> should
> coordinate this work so we dont do the same thing.
>
> Thanks,
> chris
>
> >
> >
> >
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
> > http://new.mail.yahoo.com
> >
> >
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
Want to start your own business?
Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/r-index
Re: [DISCUSS] G 2.0 M1 Content
Posted by "Christopher M. Cardona" <ch...@gmail.com>.
anita kulshreshtha wrote:
>> Content
>> -------
>> At this point M1 would contain:
>>
>> Java 1.5 as the base JDK
>> Tomcat and Jetty for Servlet 2.5, JSP 2.1 and Debugging support.
>> JTA 1.1
>> JSF (depending on where the MyFaces folks are at)
>> JSTL (I think Joe was working on this)
>>
>>
> If there is interest, I could add j2ee management 1.1.
>
> Thanks
> Anita
>
>
Anita,
I also started looking at J2EE management work and I'm just wondering
what you plan to include specifically in M1 release. I think we should
coordinate this work so we don’t do the same thing.
Thanks,
chris
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
> http://new.mail.yahoo.com
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] G 2.0 M1 Content
Posted by anita kulshreshtha <a_...@yahoo.com>.
>
> Content
> -------
> At this point M1 would contain:
>
> Java 1.5 as the base JDK
> Tomcat and Jetty for Servlet 2.5, JSP 2.1 and Debugging support.
> JTA 1.1
> JSF (depending on where the MyFaces folks are at)
> JSTL (I think Joe was working on this)
>
If there is interest, I could add j2ee management 1.1.
Thanks
Anita
____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com