You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by Matt Benson <gu...@gmail.com> on 2012/07/24 17:44:05 UTC
Re: [DISCUSS] Release Imaging 1.0 based on RC2
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 1:31 AM, Damjan Jovanovic <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 5:47 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 23, 2012, at 21:19, Damjan Jovanovic <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> It's been 3 years since Imaging 0.97 was released,
>>> and many bugs have been fixed and many features added,
>>> so I would like to release a long overdue Imaging 1.0.
>>>
>>> Imaging 1.0, RC2 is available for review here:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~damjan/imaging-1.0-RC2/
>>>
>>> Maven artifacts are here:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~damjan/imaging-1.0-RC2/maven
>>>
>>> Details of changes since 0.97 are in the release notes:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~damjan/imaging-1.0-RC2/RELEASE-NOTES.txt
>>> http://people.apache.org/~damjan/imaging-1.0-RC2/site/changes-report.html
>>>
>>> I have tested this with JDK 1.6 using maven2.
>>>
>>> The tag is here:
>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/imaging/tags/IMAGING_1_0_RC2/
>>>
>>> Site:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~damjan/imaging-1.0-RC2/site/
>>>
>>> Clirr Report is irrelevant - there is no source/binary/semantic
>>> compatibility with 0.97.
>>
>> Since this is 1.0, I am more concerned with getting the API right than
>> compatibility with a sandbox version. My question therefore is: are
>> you happy with the API?
>>
>> I am traveling ATM and cannot dig into my IDE.
>>
>> I took a peek at the reports and there are a lot of issues reported by
>> FindBugs, PMD and so on. What is the plan there?
>
> The API is fine for now. It could use some improvements, but that's
> something I'd rather leave for version 2.0.
In that case, what timeframe are you thinking of for [imaging] v2?
Matt
>
> I've already fixed all the FindBugs problems that are worth fixing,
> the rest are non-issues. The issues PMD finds (final modifiers in
> final classes, empty catch blocks, unused parameters) are things I
> consider normal.
>
>> Gary
>>
>>>
>>> RAT Report:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~damjan/imaging-1.0-RC2/site/rat-report.html
>>>
>>> Votes, please. This vote will close in 72 hours, Friday 27 July 2012
>>> at 02:00 GMT.
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 Release these artifacts
>>> [ ] +0 OK, but...
>>> [ ] -0 OK, but really should fix...
>>> [ ] -1 I oppose this release because...
>>>
>>> Thank you!
>>>
>>> Damjan Jovanovic
>
> Damjan
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Release Imaging 1.0 based on RC2
Posted by Damjan Jovanovic <da...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Matt Benson <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 1:31 AM, Damjan Jovanovic <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 5:47 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Jul 23, 2012, at 21:19, Damjan Jovanovic <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's been 3 years since Imaging 0.97 was released,
>>>> and many bugs have been fixed and many features added,
>>>> so I would like to release a long overdue Imaging 1.0.
>>>>
>>>> Imaging 1.0, RC2 is available for review here:
>>>> http://people.apache.org/~damjan/imaging-1.0-RC2/
>>>>
>>>> Maven artifacts are here:
>>>> http://people.apache.org/~damjan/imaging-1.0-RC2/maven
>>>>
>>>> Details of changes since 0.97 are in the release notes:
>>>> http://people.apache.org/~damjan/imaging-1.0-RC2/RELEASE-NOTES.txt
>>>> http://people.apache.org/~damjan/imaging-1.0-RC2/site/changes-report.html
>>>>
>>>> I have tested this with JDK 1.6 using maven2.
>>>>
>>>> The tag is here:
>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/imaging/tags/IMAGING_1_0_RC2/
>>>>
>>>> Site:
>>>> http://people.apache.org/~damjan/imaging-1.0-RC2/site/
>>>>
>>>> Clirr Report is irrelevant - there is no source/binary/semantic
>>>> compatibility with 0.97.
>>>
>>> Since this is 1.0, I am more concerned with getting the API right than
>>> compatibility with a sandbox version. My question therefore is: are
>>> you happy with the API?
>>>
>>> I am traveling ATM and cannot dig into my IDE.
>>>
>>> I took a peek at the reports and there are a lot of issues reported by
>>> FindBugs, PMD and so on. What is the plan there?
>>
>> The API is fine for now. It could use some improvements, but that's
>> something I'd rather leave for version 2.0.
>
> In that case, what timeframe are you thinking of for [imaging] v2?
>
Not long, maybe by the end of the year.
Damjan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org