You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@mina.apache.org by mclovis <mc...@mindbridge.com> on 2007/12/12 15:24:30 UTC
Mina 1 vs Mina 2 current
We currently have NIO server code working based on our own current design.
Looking at the Mina code we feel we could simplify things somewhat by
switching to Mina. We are also currently in a refactoring phase. That being
said it looks like you will release Mina2 -M1 soon and have promised GA by
summer. In your opinion, could we refactor to Mina1 for production quality
and later upgrade with some changes to Mina2 , or wait to M2. If we are
going to refactor using Mina in the near future, now is the time for us. I
am posting this trying gain some understanding of Mina1 to Mina2 features as
well as compatibility. Any insights will be appreciated.
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Mina-1-vs-Mina-2-current-tp14296037s16868p14296037.html
Sent from the Apache MINA Support Forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Mina 1 vs Mina 2 current
Posted by Trustin Lee <tr...@gmail.com>.
We currently are doing our best to stablize our API before we reach
the first RC. The API is pretty stable even now, but we will have to
see what new requirements kick in. Anyhow, the API change won't be
massive enough to make anyone get screwed up.
So, if you are under way of refactoring a project, I'd suggest you to
try the trunk.
HTH,
Trustin
On Dec 13, 2007 4:47 AM, mclovis <mc...@mindbridge.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> mclovis wrote:
> >
> > We currently have NIO server code working based on our own current
> > design. Looking at the Mina code we feel we could simplify things somewhat
> > by switching to Mina. We are also currently in a refactoring phase. That
> > being said it looks like you will release Mina2 -M1 soon and have promised
> > GA by summer. In your opinion, could we refactor to Mina1 for production
> > quality and later upgrade with some changes to Mina2 , or wait to M2. If
> > we are going to refactor using Mina in the near future, now is the time
> > for us. I am posting this trying gain some understanding of Mina1 to Mina2
> > features as well as compatibility. Any insights will be appreciated.
> >
>
> If there are any code committers following this thread any insights from
> them would also be appreciated.
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Mina-1-vs-Mina-2-current-tp14296037s16868p14302489.html
>
> Sent from the Apache MINA Support Forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
--
what we call human nature is actually human habit
--
http://gleamynode.net/
--
PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6
Re: Mina 1 vs Mina 2 current
Posted by Mark <el...@gmail.com>.
I am a committer and would suggest the trunk. While there has been alot of
work lately (mostly the good work by Trustin), I have a great deal of
confidence in the trunk and its ability to properly serve the community.
On Dec 12, 2007 2:47 PM, mclovis <mc...@mindbridge.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> mclovis wrote:
> >
> > We currently have NIO server code working based on our own current
> > design. Looking at the Mina code we feel we could simplify things
> somewhat
> > by switching to Mina. We are also currently in a refactoring phase. That
> > being said it looks like you will release Mina2 -M1 soon and have
> promised
> > GA by summer. In your opinion, could we refactor to Mina1 for production
> > quality and later upgrade with some changes to Mina2 , or wait to M2. If
> > we are going to refactor using Mina in the near future, now is the time
> > for us. I am posting this trying gain some understanding of Mina1 to
> Mina2
> > features as well as compatibility. Any insights will be appreciated.
> >
>
> If there are any code committers following this thread any insights from
> them would also be appreciated.
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Mina-1-vs-Mina-2-current-tp14296037s16868p14302489.html
> Sent from the Apache MINA Support Forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com
> .
>
>
--
--------------------------------
The adjuration to be "normal" seems shockingly repellent to me; I see
neither hope nor comfort in sinking to that low level. I think it is
ignorance that makes people think of abnormality only with horror and allows
them to remain undismayed at the proximity of "normal" to average and
mediocre. For surely anyone who achieves anything is, essentially, abnormal.
Dr. Karl Menninger
Re: Mina 1 vs Mina 2 current
Posted by Mark <el...@gmail.com>.
part of the reason I joined was to help with documentation. I will
volunteer and start a new thread on this topic.
On Dec 17, 2007 12:30 AM, Trustin Lee <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 17, 2007 2:17 PM, Mark <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Trustin, has a migration guide been started?
>
> Not yet. If you are volunteering, it's a great news.
>
> Cheers,
> Trustin
> --
> what we call human nature is actually human habit
> --
> http://gleamynode.net/
> --
> PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6
>
--
--------------------------------
The adjuration to be "normal" seems shockingly repellent to me; I see
neither hope nor comfort in sinking to that low level. I think it is
ignorance that makes people think of abnormality only with horror and allows
them to remain undismayed at the proximity of "normal" to average and
mediocre. For surely anyone who achieves anything is, essentially, abnormal.
Dr. Karl Menninger
Re: Mina 1 vs Mina 2 current
Posted by Trustin Lee <tr...@gmail.com>.
On Dec 17, 2007 2:17 PM, Mark <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Trustin, has a migration guide been started?
Not yet. If you are volunteering, it's a great news.
Cheers,
Trustin
--
what we call human nature is actually human habit
--
http://gleamynode.net/
--
PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6
Re: Mina 1 vs Mina 2 current
Posted by Mark <el...@gmail.com>.
Trustin, has a migration guide been started?
On Dec 16, 2007 11:53 PM, Trustin Lee <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Exactly. I'd like to start a vote as soon as a couple of bugs/design
> issues are fixed and migration guide becomds available.
>
> Cheers,
> Trustin
>
> On Dec 15, 2007 6:53 AM, Brian McCallister <br...@skife.org> wrote:
> > If the committers are recommending using trunk, that suggests it is
> > time for a release.
> >
> > Seriously.
> >
> > -Brian
> >
> >
> > On Dec 14, 2007, at 1:35 PM, Mike Heath wrote:
> >
> > > mclovis wrote:
> > >> mclovis wrote:
> > >>> We currently have NIO server code working based on our own current
> > >>> design. Looking at the Mina code we feel we could simplify things
> > >>> somewhat
> > >>> by switching to Mina. We are also currently in a refactoring
> > >>> phase. That
> > >>> being said it looks like you will release Mina2 -M1 soon and have
> > >>> promised
> > >>> GA by summer. In your opinion, could we refactor to Mina1 for
> > >>> production
> > >>> quality and later upgrade with some changes to Mina2 , or wait to
> > >>> M2. If
> > >>> we are going to refactor using Mina in the near future, now is the
> > >>> time
> > >>> for us. I am posting this trying gain some understanding of Mina1
> > >>> to Mina2
> > >>> features as well as compatibility. Any insights will be appreciated.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> If there are any code committers following this thread any
> > >> insights from
> > >> them would also be appreciated.
> > >
> > > I'm a committer on MINA and I would recommend using MINA TRUNK for new
> > > projects. There are a lot of really nice improvements to MINA TRUNK
> > > in
> > > terms of both performance and a better API.
> > >
> > > I'm using MINA TRUNK on a few projects right now. These projects are
> > > still in development so changes to MINA haven't been much of an issue.
> > >
> > > We would also like to get as much feedback before cutting a MINA 2.0
> > > release so the more people using MINA TRUNK the better.
> > >
> > > -Mike
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> what we call human nature is actually human habit
> --
> http://gleamynode.net/
> --
> PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6
>
--
--------------------------------
The adjuration to be "normal" seems shockingly repellent to me; I see
neither hope nor comfort in sinking to that low level. I think it is
ignorance that makes people think of abnormality only with horror and allows
them to remain undismayed at the proximity of "normal" to average and
mediocre. For surely anyone who achieves anything is, essentially, abnormal.
Dr. Karl Menninger
Re: Mina 1 vs Mina 2 current
Posted by Trustin Lee <tr...@gmail.com>.
Exactly. I'd like to start a vote as soon as a couple of bugs/design
issues are fixed and migration guide becomds available.
Cheers,
Trustin
On Dec 15, 2007 6:53 AM, Brian McCallister <br...@skife.org> wrote:
> If the committers are recommending using trunk, that suggests it is
> time for a release.
>
> Seriously.
>
> -Brian
>
>
> On Dec 14, 2007, at 1:35 PM, Mike Heath wrote:
>
> > mclovis wrote:
> >> mclovis wrote:
> >>> We currently have NIO server code working based on our own current
> >>> design. Looking at the Mina code we feel we could simplify things
> >>> somewhat
> >>> by switching to Mina. We are also currently in a refactoring
> >>> phase. That
> >>> being said it looks like you will release Mina2 -M1 soon and have
> >>> promised
> >>> GA by summer. In your opinion, could we refactor to Mina1 for
> >>> production
> >>> quality and later upgrade with some changes to Mina2 , or wait to
> >>> M2. If
> >>> we are going to refactor using Mina in the near future, now is the
> >>> time
> >>> for us. I am posting this trying gain some understanding of Mina1
> >>> to Mina2
> >>> features as well as compatibility. Any insights will be appreciated.
> >>>
> >>
> >> If there are any code committers following this thread any
> >> insights from
> >> them would also be appreciated.
> >
> > I'm a committer on MINA and I would recommend using MINA TRUNK for new
> > projects. There are a lot of really nice improvements to MINA TRUNK
> > in
> > terms of both performance and a better API.
> >
> > I'm using MINA TRUNK on a few projects right now. These projects are
> > still in development so changes to MINA haven't been much of an issue.
> >
> > We would also like to get as much feedback before cutting a MINA 2.0
> > release so the more people using MINA TRUNK the better.
> >
> > -Mike
>
>
--
what we call human nature is actually human habit
--
http://gleamynode.net/
--
PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6
Re: Mina 1 vs Mina 2 current
Posted by Brian McCallister <br...@skife.org>.
If the committers are recommending using trunk, that suggests it is
time for a release.
Seriously.
-Brian
On Dec 14, 2007, at 1:35 PM, Mike Heath wrote:
> mclovis wrote:
>> mclovis wrote:
>>> We currently have NIO server code working based on our own current
>>> design. Looking at the Mina code we feel we could simplify things
>>> somewhat
>>> by switching to Mina. We are also currently in a refactoring
>>> phase. That
>>> being said it looks like you will release Mina2 -M1 soon and have
>>> promised
>>> GA by summer. In your opinion, could we refactor to Mina1 for
>>> production
>>> quality and later upgrade with some changes to Mina2 , or wait to
>>> M2. If
>>> we are going to refactor using Mina in the near future, now is the
>>> time
>>> for us. I am posting this trying gain some understanding of Mina1
>>> to Mina2
>>> features as well as compatibility. Any insights will be appreciated.
>>>
>>
>> If there are any code committers following this thread any
>> insights from
>> them would also be appreciated.
>
> I'm a committer on MINA and I would recommend using MINA TRUNK for new
> projects. There are a lot of really nice improvements to MINA TRUNK
> in
> terms of both performance and a better API.
>
> I'm using MINA TRUNK on a few projects right now. These projects are
> still in development so changes to MINA haven't been much of an issue.
>
> We would also like to get as much feedback before cutting a MINA 2.0
> release so the more people using MINA TRUNK the better.
>
> -Mike
Re: Mina 1 vs Mina 2 current
Posted by Mike Heath <mh...@apache.org>.
mclovis wrote:
> mclovis wrote:
>> We currently have NIO server code working based on our own current
>> design. Looking at the Mina code we feel we could simplify things somewhat
>> by switching to Mina. We are also currently in a refactoring phase. That
>> being said it looks like you will release Mina2 -M1 soon and have promised
>> GA by summer. In your opinion, could we refactor to Mina1 for production
>> quality and later upgrade with some changes to Mina2 , or wait to M2. If
>> we are going to refactor using Mina in the near future, now is the time
>> for us. I am posting this trying gain some understanding of Mina1 to Mina2
>> features as well as compatibility. Any insights will be appreciated.
>>
>
> If there are any code committers following this thread any insights from
> them would also be appreciated.
I'm a committer on MINA and I would recommend using MINA TRUNK for new
projects. There are a lot of really nice improvements to MINA TRUNK in
terms of both performance and a better API.
I'm using MINA TRUNK on a few projects right now. These projects are
still in development so changes to MINA haven't been much of an issue.
We would also like to get as much feedback before cutting a MINA 2.0
release so the more people using MINA TRUNK the better.
-Mike
Re: Mina 1 vs Mina 2 current
Posted by Maarten Bosteels <mb...@gmail.com>.
On Dec 12, 2007 8:47 PM, mclovis <mc...@mindbridge.com> wrote:
>
> mclovis wrote:
> >
>
> If there are any code committers following this thread any insights from
> them would also be appreciated.
For your information: everyone that replied to this thread until now IS a
committer on the project
so I hope that gives you some confidence :-)
see http://mina.apache.org/contributors.html
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Mina-1-vs-Mina-2-current-tp14296037s16868p14302489.html
> Sent from the Apache MINA Support Forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com
> .
>
>
Re: Mina 1 vs Mina 2 current
Posted by mclovis <mc...@mindbridge.com>.
mclovis wrote:
>
> We currently have NIO server code working based on our own current
> design. Looking at the Mina code we feel we could simplify things somewhat
> by switching to Mina. We are also currently in a refactoring phase. That
> being said it looks like you will release Mina2 -M1 soon and have promised
> GA by summer. In your opinion, could we refactor to Mina1 for production
> quality and later upgrade with some changes to Mina2 , or wait to M2. If
> we are going to refactor using Mina in the near future, now is the time
> for us. I am posting this trying gain some understanding of Mina1 to Mina2
> features as well as compatibility. Any insights will be appreciated.
>
If there are any code committers following this thread any insights from
them would also be appreciated.
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Mina-1-vs-Mina-2-current-tp14296037s16868p14302489.html
Sent from the Apache MINA Support Forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Mina 1 vs Mina 2 current
Posted by Mark <el...@gmail.com>.
For my product, I am using the 2.x code because I feel that there are enough
of a difference that I do not want to have to change code once 2.x is
relesed. Plus this allows us to familiarize ourselves with one version
instead of 2.
On Dec 12, 2007 10:27 AM, Maarten Bosteels <mb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> IMO, you would be better off refactoring to a current snapshot of MINA
> 2.x(or wait for
> 2.0-M1)
>
> My company has a mission-critical application running on a snapshot of
> MINA-2.0 from some months ago, without problems.
> So I would say that the word 'stable' on
> http://mina.apache.org/downloads.html refers primarily to (lack of)
> changes
> to the API.
>
> Note that this is my very personal opinion (and contradicting the FAQ)
> Don't blame me when the latest snapshot isn't working for you :-)
>
> Maarten
>
> On Dec 12, 2007 3:24 PM, mclovis <mc...@mindbridge.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > We currently have NIO server code working based on our own current
> > design.
> > Looking at the Mina code we feel we could simplify things somewhat by
> > switching to Mina. We are also currently in a refactoring phase. That
> > being
> > said it looks like you will release Mina2 -M1 soon and have promised GA
> by
> > summer. In your opinion, could we refactor to Mina1 for production
> quality
> > and later upgrade with some changes to Mina2 , or wait to M2. If we are
> > going to refactor using Mina in the near future, now is the time for us.
> I
> > am posting this trying gain some understanding of Mina1 to Mina2
> features
> > as
> > well as compatibility. Any insights will be appreciated.
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> >
> http://www.nabble.com/Mina-1-vs-Mina-2-current-tp14296037s16868p14296037.html
> > Sent from the Apache MINA Support Forum mailing list archive at
> Nabble.com
> > .
> >
> >
>
--
--------------------------------
The adjuration to be "normal" seems shockingly repellent to me; I see
neither hope nor comfort in sinking to that low level. I think it is
ignorance that makes people think of abnormality only with horror and allows
them to remain undismayed at the proximity of "normal" to average and
mediocre. For surely anyone who achieves anything is, essentially, abnormal.
Dr. Karl Menninger
Re: Mina 1 vs Mina 2 current
Posted by Maarten Bosteels <mb...@gmail.com>.
IMO, you would be better off refactoring to a current snapshot of MINA
2.x(or wait for
2.0-M1)
My company has a mission-critical application running on a snapshot of
MINA-2.0 from some months ago, without problems.
So I would say that the word 'stable' on
http://mina.apache.org/downloads.html refers primarily to (lack of) changes
to the API.
Note that this is my very personal opinion (and contradicting the FAQ)
Don't blame me when the latest snapshot isn't working for you :-)
Maarten
On Dec 12, 2007 3:24 PM, mclovis <mc...@mindbridge.com> wrote:
>
> We currently have NIO server code working based on our own current
> design.
> Looking at the Mina code we feel we could simplify things somewhat by
> switching to Mina. We are also currently in a refactoring phase. That
> being
> said it looks like you will release Mina2 -M1 soon and have promised GA by
> summer. In your opinion, could we refactor to Mina1 for production quality
> and later upgrade with some changes to Mina2 , or wait to M2. If we are
> going to refactor using Mina in the near future, now is the time for us. I
> am posting this trying gain some understanding of Mina1 to Mina2 features
> as
> well as compatibility. Any insights will be appreciated.
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Mina-1-vs-Mina-2-current-tp14296037s16868p14296037.html
> Sent from the Apache MINA Support Forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com
> .
>
>
Re: Mina 1 vs Mina 2 current
Posted by "Steve Ulrich (proemion)" <st...@proemion.com>.
Hi!
we're using mina 2.x too and it is very stable. API changes from time to
time slightly, but most of this changes are cosmetic changes to harmonize
and clear out the API, so there's no need redesign your application, just a
bit cleanup or refactoring (which should be done regulary, though).
Just one thing: Even if it has good qualitiy, it remains development code.
So sometimes there are revisions in the vcs where something isn't working
right. So if you update your mina version, check if everything is working!
If it is not, stay with the old revision and try again later, perhaps
someone just commited the half of a change.
And ensure that all your developers work with same revision.
regards from Germany,
Steve
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Mina-1-vs-Mina-2-current-tp14296037s16868p14317205.html
Sent from the Apache MINA Support Forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.