You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by robert burrell donkin <rd...@apache.org> on 2006/02/18 16:38:35 UTC
[VOTE] Release commons-logging 1.1.0 As Alpha1
this is a little involved and the explanations a little length. if you
are just voting then please cut the context. if you wish to make some
comments then please cut the votes (this should make the thread easier
to handle.
there are two votes here: the first is a release vote on the latest
release candidate (RC5) and the second on a proposal to use a system of
promotion which would dub this release Alpha1 (to allow time for
testing. please read the proposal for more details).
JCL is an important release for a very widely used and strongly
criticised component so please take enough time to review the candidates
and spot any faults.
i'll tally the VOTEs no earlier than 2400 GMT saturday 25th february
2006.
i'd +1 to both the release vote and the process proposal
- robert
-- 8< -----------------------------------------------------------------
Release RC5
===========
This vote is for the technical check that the latest release candidate
is of sufficient quality to be a Jakarta Commons release. It's status
will depend on the result of the process vote (see below).
The release candidate is available from
http://people.apache.org/~rdonkin/commons-logging/ and the website from
http://people.apache.org/~rdonkin/commons-logging/site/. This is an
important release so please check it carefully and feel free to note any
improvements which could be made.
--8<-------------------------------------------------------------------
[ ] +1 I have checked RC5 and approve it for release
[ ] +0 I approve of the release but have not checked it in detail
[ ] -0 I disapprove of the release but have not checked it in detail
[ ] -1 I have checked RC5 and it is flawed (please list improvements
needed)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
PROCESS PROPOSAL
================
Most commons components use a release that uses multiple release
candidates. Once the release is up to the technical standards required
for Jakarta Commons releases, it is approved and released.
JCL 1.1.0 is an important release. Not only is JCL very widely used but
the limitations of the 1.0.x series of releases has been widely
reported. It is important that the 1.1 release not only resolves these
problems but also does not introduce any new ones.
I'd therefore like to propose that (for this release) the following
additions be made to the conventional process:
Release candidates will be produced as normal until one satisfies the
quality standards required for jakarta commons releases. At that stage,
though, the release will be dubbed commons-logging-1.1-alpha1. An
announcement will be made requesting that users, developers and
committers test this release. If there are no problems then a subsequent
VOTE will be held to promote this release.
The release will be recut each time but no code modifications will be
made without resetting the process.
--8<-------------------------------------------------------------------
[ ] +1 Approve this process
[ ] +0
[ ] -0
[ ] -1 Do not use this process
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: [VOTE] Release commons-logging 1.1.0 As Alpha1
Posted by Simon Kitching <sk...@apache.org>.
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 08:01 +0000, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 10:02 +1300, Simon Kitching wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > Site:
> >
> > I think the navigation panel on the left should contain a "1.1 Release"
> > section, or "latest release" heading. Without this a brief glance makes
> > it look like the latest release is 1.0.4. Alternately, the "1.0.4
> > Release" header could become "1.0.4 Release (old)" or somesuch. Or the
> > "Commons Logging" header could become "Commons Logging 1.1".
>
> good point
>
> i prefer the second suggestion:
> http://people.apache.org/~rdonkin/commons-logging/site2/
+1
That looks fine. Thanks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release commons-logging 1.1.0 As Alpha1
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 10:02 +1300, Simon Kitching wrote:
<snip>
> Site:
>
> I think the navigation panel on the left should contain a "1.1 Release"
> section, or "latest release" heading. Without this a brief glance makes
> it look like the latest release is 1.0.4. Alternately, the "1.0.4
> Release" header could become "1.0.4 Release (old)" or somesuch. Or the
> "Commons Logging" header could become "Commons Logging 1.1".
good point
i prefer the second suggestion:
http://people.apache.org/~rdonkin/commons-logging/site2/
the standard website would not change, just the release documentation.
any objections?
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release commons-logging 1.1.0 As Alpha1
Posted by Simon Kitching <sk...@apache.org>.
On Sat, 2006-02-18 at 15:38 +0000, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> -- 8< -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Release RC5
> ===========
+1 for jar.
Site:
I think the navigation panel on the left should contain a "1.1 Release"
section, or "latest release" heading. Without this a brief glance makes
it look like the latest release is 1.0.4. Alternately, the "1.0.4
Release" header could become "1.0.4 Release (old)" or somesuch. Or the
"Commons Logging" header could become "Commons Logging 1.1".
Otherwise, +1
Cheers,
Simon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release commons-logging 1.1.0 As Alpha1
Posted by Simon Kitching <sk...@apache.org>.
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 19:39 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> Releasing a limited distribution alpha sounds like a reasonable
> approach to me. If there is a chance that the public API will change
> between this release and the final, I would call it alpha, not beta.
There's no chance that the public API will change.
What might change is the internal algorithm used to determine which
classloader to load various logging-related classes from. And possibly
some extra diagnostics.
> I would also keep the jar out of ibiblio / dist - just cvs.apache.org
> - to avoid potential conflicts / support issues down the road if the
> final has to change.
>
> Phil
Cheers,
Simon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release commons-logging 1.1.0 As Alpha1
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
Releasing a limited distribution alpha sounds like a reasonable
approach to me. If there is a chance that the public API will change
between this release and the final, I would call it alpha, not beta.
I would also keep the jar out of ibiblio / dist - just cvs.apache.org
- to avoid potential conflicts / support issues down the road if the
final has to change.
Phil
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release commons-logging 1.1.0 As Alpha1
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
On Mon, 2006-02-20 at 08:53 +1300, Simon Kitching wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 12:09 +0000, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> > On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 22:59 +1300, Simon Kitching wrote:
> > > Sorry but I don't like the idea of calling the code "beta" either. I
> > > would prefer to tell Tomcat/jboss/axis etc that there is a JCL 1.1 RC5
> > > available. That tells everybody that we think things are very close to
> > > releasable state. It also tells people that they need to test & provide
> > > feedback pretty quickly if they want to influence the release. Calling
> > > this a "beta" release implies neither of those things.
> >
> > it's not about influence: it's about ensuring that the code base we have
> > really is compatible and really solves the problems we think it does. i
> > *really* don't want to spend the next year of my life fielding abuse
> > about how bad JCL 1.1 is. IMO the only way to ensure that this does not
> > happen is to get the code well tested in containers before it's full
> > official release.
> >
> > using alpha and beta's for testing is well established amongst apache
> > communities (and others) with large existing installation bases.
> >
> > a release candidate is not an official distribution of any kind. it's
> > very difficult to get unofficial distributions tested by anyone who is
> > not a developer of the product. it is very difficult to generate any
> > kind of publicity around an unofficial release. IMHO it's going to take
> > a lot more effort to talk organisations into testing an unofficial
> > distribution that it would take to approach them about testing
> > compatibility with an official public alpha or beta release.
>
> Ah. So what you really want is for this jarfile (whatever it is called)
> to be distributed via the standard jakarta download sites, rather than
> being an RC which is only available from people.apache.org/~rdonkin?
yep
it would be distributed through cvs.apache.org and would be announced
through the official channels (announcements@jakarta, news page of
jakarta and so on).
> That certainly sounds reasonable. It still sounds odd to me to call this
> "alpha" or "beta" though.
i'd need to include a lengthy explanation with the announcement.
> I'll go with whatever release approach gets consensus...
everyone but me seems to think that it's a bad idea but maybe i'll be
able to talk one or two around :)
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release commons-logging 1.1.0 As Alpha1
Posted by Simon Kitching <sk...@apache.org>.
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 12:09 +0000, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 22:59 +1300, Simon Kitching wrote:
> > Sorry but I don't like the idea of calling the code "beta" either. I
> > would prefer to tell Tomcat/jboss/axis etc that there is a JCL 1.1 RC5
> > available. That tells everybody that we think things are very close to
> > releasable state. It also tells people that they need to test & provide
> > feedback pretty quickly if they want to influence the release. Calling
> > this a "beta" release implies neither of those things.
>
> it's not about influence: it's about ensuring that the code base we have
> really is compatible and really solves the problems we think it does. i
> *really* don't want to spend the next year of my life fielding abuse
> about how bad JCL 1.1 is. IMO the only way to ensure that this does not
> happen is to get the code well tested in containers before it's full
> official release.
>
> using alpha and beta's for testing is well established amongst apache
> communities (and others) with large existing installation bases.
>
> a release candidate is not an official distribution of any kind. it's
> very difficult to get unofficial distributions tested by anyone who is
> not a developer of the product. it is very difficult to generate any
> kind of publicity around an unofficial release. IMHO it's going to take
> a lot more effort to talk organisations into testing an unofficial
> distribution that it would take to approach them about testing
> compatibility with an official public alpha or beta release.
Ah. So what you really want is for this jarfile (whatever it is called)
to be distributed via the standard jakarta download sites, rather than
being an RC which is only available from people.apache.org/~rdonkin?
That certainly sounds reasonable. It still sounds odd to me to call this
"alpha" or "beta" though.
I'll go with whatever release approach gets consensus...
Cheers,
Simon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release commons-logging 1.1.0 As Alpha1
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 22:59 +1300, Simon Kitching wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 07:59 +0000, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> > On Sat, 2006-02-18 at 16:12 +0000, Niall Pemberton wrote:
> > > On 2/18/06, robert burrell donkin <rd...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > --8<-------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > [ ] +1 Approve this process
> > > > [ ] +0
> > > > [X] -0
> > > > [ ] -1 Do not use this process
> > > > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > I think it would be a mistake to label it as "alpha". In my mind this
> > > implies either an API that is unstable and subject to change and/or
> > > software which isn't fully finished. As such many people may ignore an
> > > "alpha" release and it could reduce the number of people who test it
> > > out - since we want it tested as widely as possible my vote would be
> > > that it is labelled "beta" once it "satisfies the quality standards
> > > required for jakarta commons releases", rather than "alpha".
> >
> > i had it in mind to release the alpha without a major announcement
> > outside the commons. we need to approach some important downstream users
> > and re-packagers (jboss, axis, tomcat etc) with the new code. a beta for
> > public consumption and testing would follow once the alpha's been
> > checked by developers for those projects.
> >
> > but i can live with going straight to beta if that's what people think
> > best...
>
> Sorry but I don't like the idea of calling the code "beta" either. I
> would prefer to tell Tomcat/jboss/axis etc that there is a JCL 1.1 RC5
> available. That tells everybody that we think things are very close to
> releasable state. It also tells people that they need to test & provide
> feedback pretty quickly if they want to influence the release. Calling
> this a "beta" release implies neither of those things.
it's not about influence: it's about ensuring that the code base we have
really is compatible and really solves the problems we think it does. i
*really* don't want to spend the next year of my life fielding abuse
about how bad JCL 1.1 is. IMO the only way to ensure that this does not
happen is to get the code well tested in containers before it's full
official release.
using alpha and beta's for testing is well established amongst apache
communities (and others) with large existing installation bases.
a release candidate is not an official distribution of any kind. it's
very difficult to get unofficial distributions tested by anyone who is
not a developer of the product. it is very difficult to generate any
kind of publicity around an unofficial release. IMHO it's going to take
a lot more effort to talk organisations into testing an unofficial
distribution that it would take to approach them about testing
compatibility with an official public alpha or beta release.
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release commons-logging 1.1.0 As Alpha1
Posted by Simon Kitching <sk...@apache.org>.
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 07:59 +0000, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-02-18 at 16:12 +0000, Niall Pemberton wrote:
> > On 2/18/06, robert burrell donkin <rd...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > --8<-------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > [ ] +1 Approve this process
> > > [ ] +0
> > > [X] -0
> > > [ ] -1 Do not use this process
> > > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > I think it would be a mistake to label it as "alpha". In my mind this
> > implies either an API that is unstable and subject to change and/or
> > software which isn't fully finished. As such many people may ignore an
> > "alpha" release and it could reduce the number of people who test it
> > out - since we want it tested as widely as possible my vote would be
> > that it is labelled "beta" once it "satisfies the quality standards
> > required for jakarta commons releases", rather than "alpha".
>
> i had it in mind to release the alpha without a major announcement
> outside the commons. we need to approach some important downstream users
> and re-packagers (jboss, axis, tomcat etc) with the new code. a beta for
> public consumption and testing would follow once the alpha's been
> checked by developers for those projects.
>
> but i can live with going straight to beta if that's what people think
> best...
Sorry but I don't like the idea of calling the code "beta" either. I
would prefer to tell Tomcat/jboss/axis etc that there is a JCL 1.1 RC5
available. That tells everybody that we think things are very close to
releasable state. It also tells people that they need to test & provide
feedback pretty quickly if they want to influence the release. Calling
this a "beta" release implies neither of those things.
Regards,
Simon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release commons-logging 1.1.0 As Alpha1
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
On Sat, 2006-02-18 at 16:12 +0000, Niall Pemberton wrote:
> On 2/18/06, robert burrell donkin <rd...@apache.org> wrote:
> > --8<-------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [ ] +1 Approve this process
> > [ ] +0
> > [X] -0
> > [ ] -1 Do not use this process
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I think it would be a mistake to label it as "alpha". In my mind this
> implies either an API that is unstable and subject to change and/or
> software which isn't fully finished. As such many people may ignore an
> "alpha" release and it could reduce the number of people who test it
> out - since we want it tested as widely as possible my vote would be
> that it is labelled "beta" once it "satisfies the quality standards
> required for jakarta commons releases", rather than "alpha".
i had it in mind to release the alpha without a major announcement
outside the commons. we need to approach some important downstream users
and re-packagers (jboss, axis, tomcat etc) with the new code. a beta for
public consumption and testing would follow once the alpha's been
checked by developers for those projects.
but i can live with going straight to beta if that's what people think
best...
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release commons-logging 1.1.0 As Alpha1
Posted by Niall Pemberton <ni...@gmail.com>.
On 2/18/06, robert burrell donkin <rd...@apache.org> wrote:
> --8<-------------------------------------------------------------------
> [ ] +1 Approve this process
> [ ] +0
> [X] -0
> [ ] -1 Do not use this process
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think it would be a mistake to label it as "alpha". In my mind this
implies either an API that is unstable and subject to change and/or
software which isn't fully finished. As such many people may ignore an
"alpha" release and it could reduce the number of people who test it
out - since we want it tested as widely as possible my vote would be
that it is labelled "beta" once it "satisfies the quality standards
required for jakarta commons releases", rather than "alpha".
Niall
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release commons-logging 1.1.0 As Alpha1
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 10:21 +1100, Torsten Curdt wrote:
> On 27.02.2006, at 06:29, robert burrell donkin wrote:
>
> > too few binding votes have been cast. this release has therefore
> > failed.
>
> Argh! Currently a bit semi-offline
not a big problem as it happens: there's no real support for cutting an
alpha (which is my preferred option so that we can try to get it tested)
and there's a problem emerged with websphere. i'll cut some more
candidates and try to talk people into testing them.
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release commons-logging 1.1.0 As Alpha1
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@apache.org>.
On 27.02.2006, at 06:29, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> too few binding votes have been cast. this release has therefore
> failed.
Argh! Currently a bit semi-offline
>> i'll tally the VOTEs no earlier than 2400 GMT saturday 25th february
>> 2006.
>> --8<-----------------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>> [ ] +1 I have checked RC5 and approve it for release
>> [x] +0 I approve of the release but have not checked it in detail
>> [ ] -0 I disapprove of the release but have not checked it in detail
>> [ ] -1 I have checked RC5 and it is flawed (please list improvements
>> needed)
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --
Too late and only a +0 ...but just for the records
cheers
--
Torsten
[RESULT] [VOTE] Release commons-logging 1.1.0 As Alpha1
Posted by robert burrell donkin <rd...@apache.org>.
too few binding votes have been cast. this release has therefore
failed.
- robert
On Sat, 2006-02-18 at 15:38 +0000, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> this is a little involved and the explanations a little length. if you
> are just voting then please cut the context. if you wish to make some
> comments then please cut the votes (this should make the thread easier
> to handle.
>
> there are two votes here: the first is a release vote on the latest
> release candidate (RC5) and the second on a proposal to use a system of
> promotion which would dub this release Alpha1 (to allow time for
> testing. please read the proposal for more details).
>
> JCL is an important release for a very widely used and strongly
> criticised component so please take enough time to review the candidates
> and spot any faults.
>
> i'll tally the VOTEs no earlier than 2400 GMT saturday 25th february
> 2006.
>
> i'd +1 to both the release vote and the process proposal
>
> - robert
>
> -- 8< -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Release RC5
> ===========
>
> This vote is for the technical check that the latest release candidate
> is of sufficient quality to be a Jakarta Commons release. It's status
> will depend on the result of the process vote (see below).
>
> The release candidate is available from
> http://people.apache.org/~rdonkin/commons-logging/ and the website from
> http://people.apache.org/~rdonkin/commons-logging/site/. This is an
> important release so please check it carefully and feel free to note any
> improvements which could be made.
>
> --8<-------------------------------------------------------------------
> [ ] +1 I have checked RC5 and approve it for release
> [ ] +0 I approve of the release but have not checked it in detail
> [ ] -0 I disapprove of the release but have not checked it in detail
> [ ] -1 I have checked RC5 and it is flawed (please list improvements
> needed)
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> PROCESS PROPOSAL
> ================
>
> Most commons components use a release that uses multiple release
> candidates. Once the release is up to the technical standards required
> for Jakarta Commons releases, it is approved and released.
>
> JCL 1.1.0 is an important release. Not only is JCL very widely used but
> the limitations of the 1.0.x series of releases has been widely
> reported. It is important that the 1.1 release not only resolves these
> problems but also does not introduce any new ones.
>
> I'd therefore like to propose that (for this release) the following
> additions be made to the conventional process:
>
> Release candidates will be produced as normal until one satisfies the
> quality standards required for jakarta commons releases. At that stage,
> though, the release will be dubbed commons-logging-1.1-alpha1. An
> announcement will be made requesting that users, developers and
> committers test this release. If there are no problems then a subsequent
> VOTE will be held to promote this release.
>
> The release will be recut each time but no code modifications will be
> made without resetting the process.
>
> --8<-------------------------------------------------------------------
> [ ] +1 Approve this process
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -0
> [ ] -1 Do not use this process
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>