Roadmap for 3.0

[Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>]

I' d like to start a discussion about ServiceMix roadmap for 3.0.
IMHO, we should release a 3.0 asap, and I want to propose that
we release 3.0 at the end of August.
The main point I' d like to focus on are:
  * JBI TCK (which should be available to all committers that have signed a
NDA)
  * bug fixes
  * documentation

Any thoughts ?

Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet

Re: Roadmap for 3.0

[Ramon Buckland <no...@thebuckland.com>]

Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> The main point I' d like to focus on are:
>  * JBI TCK (which should be available to all committers that have 
> signed a
> NDA)
>  * bug fixes
>  * documentation
>
+1 from me on the list.
I would add 1 extra.
* Complete working test cases. (no -Dmaven.test.skip=true)

My other thoughts are on doco.
Documentation is the big one. It is imperative that good/great 
documentation is provided.
I am very ready to assist in this area. (hopefully not the only one)

To get this task complete, what would assist current and potential 
document writers
is a clear defined list of what is needed, going into brief detail on 
the content as a starter.

This list needs to take into account the proposed future changes 
currently in discussion
(post 3.0 I assume eg: maven archetypes, lw-container as an SE or an SL etc)
such that the doc is written to "direct" users towards some future proofing.
With Spring in there, most things are easily refactorable, just a point 
to "keep in mind" when we compile
a documentation list and it's requirements.

my 2 cents.
Ramon

Re: Roadmap for 3.0

[Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>]

On 8/1/06, Philip Dodds <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I agree that the source restructuring doesn't make much sense,  though
> that
> is only really true if we can start getting weekly builds available to
> people to use so they don't have to download M? releases and then find out
> they need something from head.


Agreed.
I must sort out the problems that happen when deploying  a snapshot.
It seems that maven fails to upload them.
James is setting up a continuum server on
http://goopen.org:8080/continuum/servlet/continuum and I hope we will be
able to
use it for nightly (or weekly) snapshot deployments .

As for the clean packaging this is really trying to reduce the download so
> that we can have a core download, components download and then the things
> like servicemix-web outside.  This can probably be done with just working
> inside the apache-servicemix assembly project.


Cool :)

P
>
> On 7/31/06, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 7/24/06, Philip Dodds <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Before pushing 3.0 out of the door I think we need to address :
> > >
> > > 1/ The project structure so that we can build core/components and
> > tooling
> > > independently
> > > 2/ The packaging so we can create clean packages
> >
> >
> > Any reason why we should do that before releasing 3.0 ?
> > The thread about the project structure
> > (see http://www.nabble.com/Source-re-structuring-tf2017112.html)
> > is still undecided.
> > Could you also be more precise about what you are referring to as "clean
> > packages" ? distributions ?
> >
> > 3/ Documentation - I don't think producing a release with re-visting the
> > > documentation is going to help people
> >
> >
> > +1
> >
> > I think 3.0 is a big and important release for ServiceMix and we should
> > make
> > > sure our ducks are in a row before putting it out there
> >
> >
> > Agreed.  But I'm not sure that restructuring the source code will have a
> > great impact on
> > users.  Once the release is out, they will mostly use it, not build it.
> > And offering several distributions may be addressed later.
> >
> > ServiceMix latest release (not milestone) is more than 8 months old, and
> > while I agree that we
> > need to work on documentation, I'm not very keen on delaying the release
> > too
> > much.
> > It will be difficult to delay the release while not developing new
> > features,
> > and at the same time,
> > adding new features will certainly delay the release due to
> stabilization
> > time, etc...
> >
> > Working on fixing all unit tests, bug fixes, samples and documentation
> > should be enough.
> > Maybe we could add some critical features (the JNDI factory to integrate
> > web
> > apps ?),
> > but we have to minimize their number, else we will never release
> anything.
> > Btw, we can not discuss TCK things in detail, but I just want to say
> that
> > we
> > should be
> > able to pass the full TCK soon (still waiting for the mailing list and
> svn
> > repo).
> >
> > I think this makes a good plan for a 3.0 release, but discussion is
> > welcome.
> > Pushing a M3 / RC1 this month (when ?) and a 3.0 asap in september
> sounds
> > like a good plan to me.
> >
> > P
> > >
> > > On 7/24/06, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I guess it mainly depends if we want a timed-box release or a
> > > featured-box
> > > > release ;)
> > > > But we must first agree on that...
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Guillaume Nodet
> > > >
> > > > On 7/24/06, Philip Dodds <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > +1 for getting a roadmap in place, though until we have a clear
> set
> > of
> > > > > stuf
> > > > > that we want in place should be set a release date?
> > > > >
> > > > > P
> > > > >
> > > > > On 7/24/06, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I' d like to start a discussion about ServiceMix roadmap for 3.0
> .
> > > > > > IMHO, we should release a 3.0 asap, and I want to propose that
> > > > > > we release 3.0 at the end of August.
> > > > > > The main point I' d like to focus on are:
> > > > > >   * JBI TCK (which should be available to all committers that
> have
> > > > > signed
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > NDA)
> > > > > >   * bug fixes
> > > > > >   * documentation
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any thoughts ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > Guillaume Nodet
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> > Guillaume Nodet
> >
> >
>
>


-- 
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet

Re: Roadmap for 3.0

[Philip Dodds <ph...@gmail.com>]

I agree that the source restructuring doesn't make much sense,  though that
is only really true if we can start getting weekly builds available to
people to use so they don't have to download M? releases and then find out
they need something from head.

As for the clean packaging this is really trying to reduce the download so
that we can have a core download, components download and then the things
like servicemix-web outside.  This can probably be done with just working
inside the apache-servicemix assembly project.

P

On 7/31/06, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 7/24/06, Philip Dodds <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Before pushing 3.0 out of the door I think we need to address :
> >
> > 1/ The project structure so that we can build core/components and
> tooling
> > independently
> > 2/ The packaging so we can create clean packages
>
>
> Any reason why we should do that before releasing 3.0 ?
> The thread about the project structure
> (see http://www.nabble.com/Source-re-structuring-tf2017112.html)
> is still undecided.
> Could you also be more precise about what you are referring to as "clean
> packages" ? distributions ?
>
> 3/ Documentation - I don't think producing a release with re-visting the
> > documentation is going to help people
>
>
> +1
>
> I think 3.0 is a big and important release for ServiceMix and we should
> make
> > sure our ducks are in a row before putting it out there
>
>
> Agreed.  But I'm not sure that restructuring the source code will have a
> great impact on
> users.  Once the release is out, they will mostly use it, not build it.
> And offering several distributions may be addressed later.
>
> ServiceMix latest release (not milestone) is more than 8 months old, and
> while I agree that we
> need to work on documentation, I'm not very keen on delaying the release
> too
> much.
> It will be difficult to delay the release while not developing new
> features,
> and at the same time,
> adding new features will certainly delay the release due to stabilization
> time, etc...
>
> Working on fixing all unit tests, bug fixes, samples and documentation
> should be enough.
> Maybe we could add some critical features (the JNDI factory to integrate
> web
> apps ?),
> but we have to minimize their number, else we will never release anything.
> Btw, we can not discuss TCK things in detail, but I just want to say that
> we
> should be
> able to pass the full TCK soon (still waiting for the mailing list and svn
> repo).
>
> I think this makes a good plan for a 3.0 release, but discussion is
> welcome.
> Pushing a M3 / RC1 this month (when ?) and a 3.0 asap in september sounds
> like a good plan to me.
>
> P
> >
> > On 7/24/06, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I guess it mainly depends if we want a timed-box release or a
> > featured-box
> > > release ;)
> > > But we must first agree on that...
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Guillaume Nodet
> > >
> > > On 7/24/06, Philip Dodds <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > +1 for getting a roadmap in place, though until we have a clear set
> of
> > > > stuf
> > > > that we want in place should be set a release date?
> > > >
> > > > P
> > > >
> > > > On 7/24/06, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I' d like to start a discussion about ServiceMix roadmap for 3.0.
> > > > > IMHO, we should release a 3.0 asap, and I want to propose that
> > > > > we release 3.0 at the end of August.
> > > > > The main point I' d like to focus on are:
> > > > >   * JBI TCK (which should be available to all committers that have
> > > > signed
> > > > > a
> > > > > NDA)
> > > > >   * bug fixes
> > > > >   * documentation
> > > > >
> > > > > Any thoughts ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > Guillaume Nodet
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
>
>

Re: Roadmap for 3.0

[Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>]

On 7/24/06, Philip Dodds <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Before pushing 3.0 out of the door I think we need to address :
>
> 1/ The project structure so that we can build core/components and tooling
> independently
> 2/ The packaging so we can create clean packages


Any reason why we should do that before releasing 3.0 ?
The thread about the project structure
(see http://www.nabble.com/Source-re-structuring-tf2017112.html)
is still undecided.
Could you also be more precise about what you are referring to as "clean
packages" ? distributions ?

3/ Documentation - I don't think producing a release with re-visting the
> documentation is going to help people


+1

I think 3.0 is a big and important release for ServiceMix and we should make
> sure our ducks are in a row before putting it out there


Agreed.  But I'm not sure that restructuring the source code will have a
great impact on
users.  Once the release is out, they will mostly use it, not build it.
And offering several distributions may be addressed later.

ServiceMix latest release (not milestone) is more than 8 months old, and
while I agree that we
need to work on documentation, I'm not very keen on delaying the release too
much.
It will be difficult to delay the release while not developing new features,
and at the same time,
adding new features will certainly delay the release due to stabilization
time, etc...

Working on fixing all unit tests, bug fixes, samples and documentation
should be enough.
Maybe we could add some critical features (the JNDI factory to integrate web
apps ?),
but we have to minimize their number, else we will never release anything.
Btw, we can not discuss TCK things in detail, but I just want to say that we
should be
able to pass the full TCK soon (still waiting for the mailing list and svn
repo).

I think this makes a good plan for a 3.0 release, but discussion is welcome.
Pushing a M3 / RC1 this month (when ?) and a 3.0 asap in september sounds
like a good plan to me.

P
>
> On 7/24/06, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I guess it mainly depends if we want a timed-box release or a
> featured-box
> > release ;)
> > But we must first agree on that...
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Guillaume Nodet
> >
> > On 7/24/06, Philip Dodds <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > +1 for getting a roadmap in place, though until we have a clear set of
> > > stuf
> > > that we want in place should be set a release date?
> > >
> > > P
> > >
> > > On 7/24/06, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I' d like to start a discussion about ServiceMix roadmap for 3.0.
> > > > IMHO, we should release a 3.0 asap, and I want to propose that
> > > > we release 3.0 at the end of August.
> > > > The main point I' d like to focus on are:
> > > >   * JBI TCK (which should be available to all committers that have
> > > signed
> > > > a
> > > > NDA)
> > > >   * bug fixes
> > > >   * documentation
> > > >
> > > > Any thoughts ?
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Guillaume Nodet
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>


-- 
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet

Re: Roadmap for 3.0

[Philip Dodds <ph...@gmail.com>]

Before pushing 3.0 out of the door I think we need to address :

1/ The project structure so that we can build core/components and tooling
independently
2/ The packaging so we can create clean packages
3/ Documentation - I don't think producing a release with re-visting the
documentation is going to help people

I think 3.0 is a big and important release for ServiceMix and we should make
sure our ducks are in a row before putting it out there

P

On 7/24/06, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I guess it mainly depends if we want a timed-box release or a featured-box
> release ;)
> But we must first agree on that...
>
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
>
> On 7/24/06, Philip Dodds <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > +1 for getting a roadmap in place, though until we have a clear set of
> > stuf
> > that we want in place should be set a release date?
> >
> > P
> >
> > On 7/24/06, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I' d like to start a discussion about ServiceMix roadmap for 3.0.
> > > IMHO, we should release a 3.0 asap, and I want to propose that
> > > we release 3.0 at the end of August.
> > > The main point I' d like to focus on are:
> > >   * JBI TCK (which should be available to all committers that have
> > signed
> > > a
> > > NDA)
> > >   * bug fixes
> > >   * documentation
> > >
> > > Any thoughts ?
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Guillaume Nodet
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Re: Roadmap for 3.0

[Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>]

I guess it mainly depends if we want a timed-box release or a featured-box
release ;)
But we must first agree on that...

Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet

On 7/24/06, Philip Dodds <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +1 for getting a roadmap in place, though until we have a clear set of
> stuf
> that we want in place should be set a release date?
>
> P
>
> On 7/24/06, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I' d like to start a discussion about ServiceMix roadmap for 3.0.
> > IMHO, we should release a 3.0 asap, and I want to propose that
> > we release 3.0 at the end of August.
> > The main point I' d like to focus on are:
> >   * JBI TCK (which should be available to all committers that have
> signed
> > a
> > NDA)
> >   * bug fixes
> >   * documentation
> >
> > Any thoughts ?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Guillaume Nodet
> >
> >
>
>

Re: Roadmap for 3.0

[Philip Dodds <ph...@gmail.com>]

+1 for getting a roadmap in place, though until we have a clear set of stuf
that we want in place should be set a release date?

P

On 7/24/06, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I' d like to start a discussion about ServiceMix roadmap for 3.0.
> IMHO, we should release a 3.0 asap, and I want to propose that
> we release 3.0 at the end of August.
> The main point I' d like to focus on are:
>   * JBI TCK (which should be available to all committers that have signed
> a
> NDA)
>   * bug fixes
>   * documentation
>
> Any thoughts ?
>
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
>
>