You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geode.apache.org by Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io> on 2016/09/02 15:46:10 UTC
M3 is done, what's next?
Hi everyone,
We completed the M3 release in August and now we should consider the scope for the next release: 1.0.0-incubating. We’ve had previous discussions on this topic [1] but I would like us to reopen the conversation and make sure we are all still in agreement. In particular, I think we are getting pretty close to being ready for graduation [2] with one exception: we need to rename our source packages to ‘org.apache.geode’ [3].
I think we should move forward with package renaming *now* and include that in the scope for the 1.0.0-incubating release.
As previously discussed [4] we’d like to preserve protocol compatibility for existing users of client/server and WAN. This should only affect a handful of classes that would remain in the ‘com.gemstone.gemfire’ namespace (we should identify those soon).
Thoughts? What else belongs in 1.0.0-incubating?
Anthony
[1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geode-dev/201604.mbox/%3cCAFh+7k1nMh8muFDs7NuXzj7q3mBy9NrJeC0jMA=hqxE=EAfWxw@mail.gmail.com%3e
[2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Maturity+Level
[3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-37
[4] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-geode-dev/201509.mbox/%3cCAEzsiBOUmfdmQA8X29gzUTeB_6jV9tbDLHCZYXhFSbBXmaQQAw@mail.gmail.com%3e
Re: M3 is done, what's next?
Posted by Udo Kohlmeyer <uk...@pivotal.io>.
+1 for package renaming
+1 for sooner than later
On 3/09/2016 2:46 AM, Dan Smith wrote:
> +1 For renaming the packages. It would be really nice to graduate ASAP! Is
> there anything else from a code perspective that we need to do before
> graduation? If so we should also get that in 1.0.
>
> It would be nice to get a few more examples in the codebase for 1.0. We
> should probably just generally review the documentation we're shipping with
> 1.0. Actually, it would be nice if the docs hosted on
> http://geode.docs.pivotal.io/ could get incorporated as well (I think
> pivotal is still planning on donating those docs?), but I don't think we
> should hold up 1.0 or graduation based on that.
>
> We should probably review our dependencies and update anything that's out
> of date for 1.0.
>
> We should also coordinate the package renaming with Spring Data Geode.
>
> -Dan
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Greg Chase <gr...@gregchase.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>>
>>> with one exception: we need to rename our source packages to
>>> \u2018org.apache.geode\u2019 [3].
>>>
>>> I think we should move forward with package renaming *now* and include
>>> that in the scope for the 1.0.0-incubating release.
>>>
>>> As previously discussed [4] we\u2019d like to preserve protocol compatibility
>>> for existing users of client/server and WAN. This should only affect a
>>> handful of classes that would remain in the \u2018com.gemstone.gemfire\u2019
>>> namespace (we should identify those soon).
>>>
>> Agreed. Now is the time. Later is always worse then now when it occurs.
>>
Re: M3 is done, what's next?
Posted by John Blum <jb...@pivotal.io>.
+1 for making changes sooner rather than later.
Also, thank you Dan for mentioning this effort will need to coordinated
with *Spring Data Geode*.
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 10:39 AM, Darrel Schneider <ds...@pivotal.io>
wrote:
> +1 for renaming the packages
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Michael Stolz <ms...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
> > +1 for renaming packages now.
> >
> > We might consider having a look at the examples to make sure we have
> > covered off-heap and integrated security.
> >
> > --
> > Mike Stolz
> > Principal Engineer - Gemfire Product Manager
> > Mobile: 631-835-4771
> > On Sep 2, 2016 9:47 AM, "Dan Smith" <ds...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 For renaming the packages. It would be really nice to graduate ASAP!
> > Is
> > > there anything else from a code perspective that we need to do before
> > > graduation? If so we should also get that in 1.0.
> > >
> > > It would be nice to get a few more examples in the codebase for 1.0. We
> > > should probably just generally review the documentation we're shipping
> > with
> > > 1.0. Actually, it would be nice if the docs hosted on
> > > http://geode.docs.pivotal.io/ could get incorporated as well (I think
> > > pivotal is still planning on donating those docs?), but I don't think
> we
> > > should hold up 1.0 or graduation based on that.
> > >
> > > We should probably review our dependencies and update anything that's
> out
> > > of date for 1.0.
> > >
> > > We should also coordinate the package renaming with Spring Data Geode.
> > >
> > > -Dan
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Greg Chase <gr...@gregchase.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > with one exception: we need to rename our source packages to
> > > > > ‘org.apache.geode’ [3].
> > > > >
> > > > > I think we should move forward with package renaming *now* and
> > include
> > > > > that in the scope for the 1.0.0-incubating release.
> > > > >
> > > > > As previously discussed [4] we’d like to preserve protocol
> > > compatibility
> > > > > for existing users of client/server and WAN. This should only
> > affect a
> > > > > handful of classes that would remain in the ‘com.gemstone.gemfire’
> > > > > namespace (we should identify those soon).
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Agreed. Now is the time. Later is always worse then now when it
> > occurs.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
--
-John
503-504-8657
john.blum10101 (skype)
Re: M3 is done, what's next?
Posted by Darrel Schneider <ds...@pivotal.io>.
+1 for renaming the packages
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Michael Stolz <ms...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> +1 for renaming packages now.
>
> We might consider having a look at the examples to make sure we have
> covered off-heap and integrated security.
>
> --
> Mike Stolz
> Principal Engineer - Gemfire Product Manager
> Mobile: 631-835-4771
> On Sep 2, 2016 9:47 AM, "Dan Smith" <ds...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
> > +1 For renaming the packages. It would be really nice to graduate ASAP!
> Is
> > there anything else from a code perspective that we need to do before
> > graduation? If so we should also get that in 1.0.
> >
> > It would be nice to get a few more examples in the codebase for 1.0. We
> > should probably just generally review the documentation we're shipping
> with
> > 1.0. Actually, it would be nice if the docs hosted on
> > http://geode.docs.pivotal.io/ could get incorporated as well (I think
> > pivotal is still planning on donating those docs?), but I don't think we
> > should hold up 1.0 or graduation based on that.
> >
> > We should probably review our dependencies and update anything that's out
> > of date for 1.0.
> >
> > We should also coordinate the package renaming with Spring Data Geode.
> >
> > -Dan
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Greg Chase <gr...@gregchase.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > with one exception: we need to rename our source packages to
> > > > ‘org.apache.geode’ [3].
> > > >
> > > > I think we should move forward with package renaming *now* and
> include
> > > > that in the scope for the 1.0.0-incubating release.
> > > >
> > > > As previously discussed [4] we’d like to preserve protocol
> > compatibility
> > > > for existing users of client/server and WAN. This should only
> affect a
> > > > handful of classes that would remain in the ‘com.gemstone.gemfire’
> > > > namespace (we should identify those soon).
> > > >
> > >
> > > Agreed. Now is the time. Later is always worse then now when it
> occurs.
> > >
> >
>
Re: M3 is done, what's next?
Posted by Michael Stolz <ms...@pivotal.io>.
+1 for renaming packages now.
We might consider having a look at the examples to make sure we have
covered off-heap and integrated security.
--
Mike Stolz
Principal Engineer - Gemfire Product Manager
Mobile: 631-835-4771
On Sep 2, 2016 9:47 AM, "Dan Smith" <ds...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> +1 For renaming the packages. It would be really nice to graduate ASAP! Is
> there anything else from a code perspective that we need to do before
> graduation? If so we should also get that in 1.0.
>
> It would be nice to get a few more examples in the codebase for 1.0. We
> should probably just generally review the documentation we're shipping with
> 1.0. Actually, it would be nice if the docs hosted on
> http://geode.docs.pivotal.io/ could get incorporated as well (I think
> pivotal is still planning on donating those docs?), but I don't think we
> should hold up 1.0 or graduation based on that.
>
> We should probably review our dependencies and update anything that's out
> of date for 1.0.
>
> We should also coordinate the package renaming with Spring Data Geode.
>
> -Dan
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Greg Chase <gr...@gregchase.com> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> >
> > > with one exception: we need to rename our source packages to
> > > ‘org.apache.geode’ [3].
> > >
> > > I think we should move forward with package renaming *now* and include
> > > that in the scope for the 1.0.0-incubating release.
> > >
> > > As previously discussed [4] we’d like to preserve protocol
> compatibility
> > > for existing users of client/server and WAN. This should only affect a
> > > handful of classes that would remain in the ‘com.gemstone.gemfire’
> > > namespace (we should identify those soon).
> > >
> >
> > Agreed. Now is the time. Later is always worse then now when it occurs.
> >
>
Re: M3 is done, what's next?
Posted by Dan Smith <ds...@pivotal.io>.
+1 For renaming the packages. It would be really nice to graduate ASAP! Is
there anything else from a code perspective that we need to do before
graduation? If so we should also get that in 1.0.
It would be nice to get a few more examples in the codebase for 1.0. We
should probably just generally review the documentation we're shipping with
1.0. Actually, it would be nice if the docs hosted on
http://geode.docs.pivotal.io/ could get incorporated as well (I think
pivotal is still planning on donating those docs?), but I don't think we
should hold up 1.0 or graduation based on that.
We should probably review our dependencies and update anything that's out
of date for 1.0.
We should also coordinate the package renaming with Spring Data Geode.
-Dan
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Greg Chase <gr...@gregchase.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
> > with one exception: we need to rename our source packages to
> > ‘org.apache.geode’ [3].
> >
> > I think we should move forward with package renaming *now* and include
> > that in the scope for the 1.0.0-incubating release.
> >
> > As previously discussed [4] we’d like to preserve protocol compatibility
> > for existing users of client/server and WAN. This should only affect a
> > handful of classes that would remain in the ‘com.gemstone.gemfire’
> > namespace (we should identify those soon).
> >
>
> Agreed. Now is the time. Later is always worse then now when it occurs.
>
Re: M3 is done, what's next?
Posted by Greg Chase <gr...@gregchase.com>.
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> with one exception: we need to rename our source packages to
> ‘org.apache.geode’ [3].
>
> I think we should move forward with package renaming *now* and include
> that in the scope for the 1.0.0-incubating release.
>
> As previously discussed [4] we’d like to preserve protocol compatibility
> for existing users of client/server and WAN. This should only affect a
> handful of classes that would remain in the ‘com.gemstone.gemfire’
> namespace (we should identify those soon).
>
Agreed. Now is the time. Later is always worse then now when it occurs.
Re: M3 is done, what's next?
Posted by Joey McAllister <jm...@pivotal.io>.
+1
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 11:52 AM Kirk Lund <kl...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> +1
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <
> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 for package renaming.
> >
> > Sai
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 11:42 AM, William Markito <wm...@pivotal.io>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > ++1 to finally do it! This is great!
> > >
> > > We should include not only Spring Data Geode but also Apache Zeppelin,
> > > Apache Apex...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi everyone,
> > > >
> > > > We completed the M3 release in August and now we should consider the
> > > scope
> > > > for the next release: 1.0.0-incubating. We’ve had previous
> > discussions
> > > on
> > > > this topic [1] but I would like us to reopen the conversation and
> make
> > > sure
> > > > we are all still in agreement. In particular, I think we are getting
> > > > pretty close to being ready for graduation [2] with one exception:
> we
> > > need
> > > > to rename our source packages to ‘org.apache.geode’ [3].
> > > >
> > > > I think we should move forward with package renaming *now* and
> include
> > > > that in the scope for the 1.0.0-incubating release.
> > > >
> > > > As previously discussed [4] we’d like to preserve protocol
> > compatibility
> > > > for existing users of client/server and WAN. This should only
> affect a
> > > > handful of classes that would remain in the ‘com.gemstone.gemfire’
> > > > namespace (we should identify those soon).
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts? What else belongs in 1.0.0-incubating?
> > > >
> > > > Anthony
> > > >
> > > > [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geode-dev/201604.
> > > > mbox/%3cCAFh+7k1nMh8muFDs7NuXzj7q3mBy9NrJeC
> > 0jMA=hqxE=EAfWxw@mail.gmail.
> > > > com%3e
> > > > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Maturity+Level
> > > > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-37
> > > > [4] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-geode-
> > > > dev/201509.mbox/%3cCAEzsiBOUmfdmQA8X29gzUTeB_
> > 6jV9tbDLHCZYXhFSbBXmaQQAw@
> > > > mail.gmail.com%3e
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > ~/William
> > >
> >
>
Re: M3 is done, what's next?
Posted by Kirk Lund <kl...@pivotal.io>.
+1
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <sa...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> +1 for package renaming.
>
> Sai
>
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 11:42 AM, William Markito <wm...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
>
> > ++1 to finally do it! This is great!
> >
> > We should include not only Spring Data Geode but also Apache Zeppelin,
> > Apache Apex...
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > We completed the M3 release in August and now we should consider the
> > scope
> > > for the next release: 1.0.0-incubating. We’ve had previous
> discussions
> > on
> > > this topic [1] but I would like us to reopen the conversation and make
> > sure
> > > we are all still in agreement. In particular, I think we are getting
> > > pretty close to being ready for graduation [2] with one exception: we
> > need
> > > to rename our source packages to ‘org.apache.geode’ [3].
> > >
> > > I think we should move forward with package renaming *now* and include
> > > that in the scope for the 1.0.0-incubating release.
> > >
> > > As previously discussed [4] we’d like to preserve protocol
> compatibility
> > > for existing users of client/server and WAN. This should only affect a
> > > handful of classes that would remain in the ‘com.gemstone.gemfire’
> > > namespace (we should identify those soon).
> > >
> > > Thoughts? What else belongs in 1.0.0-incubating?
> > >
> > > Anthony
> > >
> > > [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geode-dev/201604.
> > > mbox/%3cCAFh+7k1nMh8muFDs7NuXzj7q3mBy9NrJeC
> 0jMA=hqxE=EAfWxw@mail.gmail.
> > > com%3e
> > > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Maturity+Level
> > > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-37
> > > [4] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-geode-
> > > dev/201509.mbox/%3cCAEzsiBOUmfdmQA8X29gzUTeB_
> 6jV9tbDLHCZYXhFSbBXmaQQAw@
> > > mail.gmail.com%3e
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > ~/William
> >
>
Re: M3 is done, what's next?
Posted by Sai Boorlagadda <sa...@gmail.com>.
+1 for package renaming.
Sai
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 11:42 AM, William Markito <wm...@pivotal.io>
wrote:
> ++1 to finally do it! This is great!
>
> We should include not only Spring Data Geode but also Apache Zeppelin,
> Apache Apex...
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > We completed the M3 release in August and now we should consider the
> scope
> > for the next release: 1.0.0-incubating. We’ve had previous discussions
> on
> > this topic [1] but I would like us to reopen the conversation and make
> sure
> > we are all still in agreement. In particular, I think we are getting
> > pretty close to being ready for graduation [2] with one exception: we
> need
> > to rename our source packages to ‘org.apache.geode’ [3].
> >
> > I think we should move forward with package renaming *now* and include
> > that in the scope for the 1.0.0-incubating release.
> >
> > As previously discussed [4] we’d like to preserve protocol compatibility
> > for existing users of client/server and WAN. This should only affect a
> > handful of classes that would remain in the ‘com.gemstone.gemfire’
> > namespace (we should identify those soon).
> >
> > Thoughts? What else belongs in 1.0.0-incubating?
> >
> > Anthony
> >
> > [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geode-dev/201604.
> > mbox/%3cCAFh+7k1nMh8muFDs7NuXzj7q3mBy9NrJeC0jMA=hqxE=EAfWxw@mail.gmail.
> > com%3e
> > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Maturity+Level
> > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-37
> > [4] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-geode-
> > dev/201509.mbox/%3cCAEzsiBOUmfdmQA8X29gzUTeB_6jV9tbDLHCZYXhFSbBXmaQQAw@
> > mail.gmail.com%3e
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> ~/William
>
Re: M3 is done, what's next?
Posted by William Markito <wm...@pivotal.io>.
++1 to finally do it! This is great!
We should include not only Spring Data Geode but also Apache Zeppelin,
Apache Apex...
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> We completed the M3 release in August and now we should consider the scope
> for the next release: 1.0.0-incubating. We’ve had previous discussions on
> this topic [1] but I would like us to reopen the conversation and make sure
> we are all still in agreement. In particular, I think we are getting
> pretty close to being ready for graduation [2] with one exception: we need
> to rename our source packages to ‘org.apache.geode’ [3].
>
> I think we should move forward with package renaming *now* and include
> that in the scope for the 1.0.0-incubating release.
>
> As previously discussed [4] we’d like to preserve protocol compatibility
> for existing users of client/server and WAN. This should only affect a
> handful of classes that would remain in the ‘com.gemstone.gemfire’
> namespace (we should identify those soon).
>
> Thoughts? What else belongs in 1.0.0-incubating?
>
> Anthony
>
> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geode-dev/201604.
> mbox/%3cCAFh+7k1nMh8muFDs7NuXzj7q3mBy9NrJeC0jMA=hqxE=EAfWxw@mail.gmail.
> com%3e
> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Maturity+Level
> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-37
> [4] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-geode-
> dev/201509.mbox/%3cCAEzsiBOUmfdmQA8X29gzUTeB_6jV9tbDLHCZYXhFSbBXmaQQAw@
> mail.gmail.com%3e
>
--
~/William