You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@syncope.apache.org by Colm O hEigeartaigh <co...@apache.org> on 2013/02/19 15:19:14 UTC
Re: [connid-dev] Re: CSV Connector SNAPSHOT version
> Given the retro-compatibility feature reported above, if confirmed
> working, I think that we can move Syncope 1.1.0 to ConnId 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT,
> thus avoid branching.
>
> Sorry for not having made this re-thinking clear.
Ah, ok got it, thanks.
Colm.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Francesco Chicchiriccò <
ilgrosso@apache.org> wrote:
> On 19/02/2013 13:04, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
>
>> Hi Francesco,
>>
>> I thought we could avoid this branching if we are able to verify that
>>> you can use "old" (e.g. compiled against ConnId 1.3.2) connectors with "new"
>>> (e.g. 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT) framework,
>>>
>>
>> Ok, I guess I misunderstood. I understand that we want to run an "old"
>> connector with the new framework, and so for example the CSV 0.6.x branch
>> should be able to run against the 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT framework version.
>>
>> I don't understand though how we can avoid branching DB + LDAP if we want
>> to have the fixes I mentioned available in Syncope 1.1?
>>
>
> Given the retro-compatibility feature reported above, if confirmed
> working, I think that we can move Syncope 1.1.0 to ConnId 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT,
> thus avoid branching.
>
> Sorry for not having made this re-thinking clear.
>
> Regards.
>
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò <
>> ilgrosso@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 19/02/2013 12:51, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
>>>
>>> How about a new branch for the LDAP + DB bundles that I can backport
>>>>
>>>>> fixes to?
>>>>>
>>>>> In terms of the DB Connector first, trunk is at 2.1.5-SNAPSHOT. How
>>>> about
>>>> I
>>>> update trunk to 2.2-SNAPSHOT + create a new branch called "2.1.X" (with
>>>> version 2.1.5-SNAPSHOT) before the recent revisions were made? I will
>>>> then
>>>> selectively merge various fixes. Any objections to this?
>>>>
>>>> I thought we could avoid this branching if we are able to verify that
>>> you
>>> can use "old" (e.g. compiled against ConnId 1.3.2) connectors with "new"
>>> (e.g. 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT) framework,
>>>
>>> Am I wrong?
>>>
>>> Regards.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Fabio Martelli
>>>
>>>> <fa...@gmail.com>****wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Il giorno 19/feb/2013, alle ore 11.44, Colm O hEigeartaigh ha scritto:
>>>>
>>>>> Guys, I'd prefere to keep the 1.3.2 for Syncope 1.1.0.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Since we are expecting to release soon I'd like to be sure about the
>>>>>>> reliability of the 1.1.0.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why do you think 1.3.3 would be particularly unreliable? There have
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> been many fixes made from what I can see.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't have strong objections to using 1.3.2 for Syncope 1.1,
>>>>>> however I
>>>>>> would like if the fixes I've made make it into Syncope for 1.1. I will
>>>>>> backport the CSV fixes to the branch. How about a new branch for the
>>>>>>
>>>>>> LDAP +
>>>>>
>>>>> DB bundles that I can backport fixes to? In particular I would like to
>>>>>>
>>>>>> have
>>>>>
>>>>> LDAP-2, LDAP-5 and LDAP-6 available in Syncope 1.1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OK Colm, probably we can do the following.
>>>>> Since I'd like to maintain the possibility to switch from a newest
>>>>> connector version to an old one I'd ask you to verify before the
>>>>> possibility to run, for example, CsvDir 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT with the latest
>>>>> framework version.
>>>>> If I well remember this should be possible (the opposite is not
>>>>> possible
>>>>> for sure). This would be sufficient to have my +1.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> F.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Fabio Martelli
>>>>>
>>>>>> <fa...@gmail.com>****wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Il giorno 19/feb/2013, alle ore 11.28, Colm O hEigeartaigh ha
>>>>>> scritto:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When using the CSVDir 0.7-SNAPSHOT we would be forced to use ConnId
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT instead of 1.3.2.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is there any reason why we can't just do that on trunk anyway? I
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> assume
>>>>>>>> we're going to release Syncope 1.1 with ConnId 1.3.3 anyway?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Guys, I'd prefere to keep the 1.3.2 for Syncope 1.1.0.
>>>>>>> Since we are expecting to release soon I'd like to be sure about the
>>>>>>> reliability of the 1.1.0.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> F.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why not backporting your fix on 0.7-SNAPSHOT to 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I will do.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Colm.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò <
>>>>>>>> ilgrosso@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 19/02/2013 11:13, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Following the query on the CSV SNAPSHOT in Syncope, just wondering
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> why
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> we including 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT on trunk instead of 0.7-SNAPSHOT? The
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> former
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> does not include the fixes I made recently (in particular the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> properties
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> file is in the wrong package name, and so the correct property keys
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> displayed in Syncope).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> When using the CSVDir 0.7-SNAPSHOT we would be forced to use
>>>>>>>>>> ConnId
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT instead of 1.3.2.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Why not backporting your fix on 0.7-SNAPSHOT to 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
> --
> Francesco Chicchiriccò
>
> ASF Member, Apache Syncope PMC chair, Apache Cocoon PMC Member
> http://people.apache.org/~**ilgrosso/<http://people.apache.org/~ilgrosso/>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "connid-dev" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to connid-dev+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<co...@googlegroups.com>
> .
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**group/connid-dev?hl=en-US<http://groups.google.com/group/connid-dev?hl=en-US>
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out>
> .
>
>
>
--
Colm O hEigeartaigh
Talend Community Coder
http://coders.talend.com
Re: [connid-dev] Re: CSV Connector SNAPSHOT version
Posted by Fabio Martelli <fa...@gmail.com>.
Il giorno 20/feb/2013, alle ore 13.28, Colm O hEigeartaigh ha scritto:
>> think that we can move Syncope 1.1.0 to ConnId 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT, thus avoid
>> branching.
>>
>
> Any objections to me moving the Syncope trunk pom to use 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT,
> and the SNAPSHOT versions of the Connector bundles?
+1
>
> Colm.
>
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Colm O hEigeartaigh <co...@apache.org>wrote:
>
>>
>> Given the retro-compatibility feature reported above, if confirmed
>>> working, I think that we can move Syncope 1.1.0 to ConnId 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT,
>>> thus avoid branching.
>>>
>>> Sorry for not having made this re-thinking clear.
>>
>>
>> Ah, ok got it, thanks.
>>
>> Colm.
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Francesco Chicchiriccò <
>> ilgrosso@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 19/02/2013 13:04, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Francesco,
>>>>
>>>> I thought we could avoid this branching if we are able to verify that
>>>>> you can use "old" (e.g. compiled against ConnId 1.3.2) connectors with "new"
>>>>> (e.g. 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT) framework,
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ok, I guess I misunderstood. I understand that we want to run an "old"
>>>> connector with the new framework, and so for example the CSV 0.6.x branch
>>>> should be able to run against the 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT framework version.
>>>>
>>>> I don't understand though how we can avoid branching DB + LDAP if we want
>>>> to have the fixes I mentioned available in Syncope 1.1?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Given the retro-compatibility feature reported above, if confirmed
>>> working, I think that we can move Syncope 1.1.0 to ConnId 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT,
>>> thus avoid branching.
>>>
>>> Sorry for not having made this re-thinking clear.
>>>
>>> Regards.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò <
>>>> ilgrosso@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 19/02/2013 12:51, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> How about a new branch for the LDAP + DB bundles that I can backport
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> fixes to?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In terms of the DB Connector first, trunk is at 2.1.5-SNAPSHOT. How
>>>>>> about
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> update trunk to 2.2-SNAPSHOT + create a new branch called "2.1.X" (with
>>>>>> version 2.1.5-SNAPSHOT) before the recent revisions were made? I will
>>>>>> then
>>>>>> selectively merge various fixes. Any objections to this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought we could avoid this branching if we are able to verify that
>>>>> you
>>>>> can use "old" (e.g. compiled against ConnId 1.3.2) connectors with "new"
>>>>> (e.g. 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT) framework,
>>>>>
>>>>> Am I wrong?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Fabio Martelli
>>>>>
>>>>>> <fa...@gmail.com>****wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Il giorno 19/feb/2013, alle ore 11.44, Colm O hEigeartaigh ha
>>>>>> scritto:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Guys, I'd prefere to keep the 1.3.2 for Syncope 1.1.0.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Since we are expecting to release soon I'd like to be sure about the
>>>>>>>>> reliability of the 1.1.0.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Why do you think 1.3.3 would be particularly unreliable? There
>>>>>>>> have not
>>>>>>>> been many fixes made from what I can see.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't have strong objections to using 1.3.2 for Syncope 1.1,
>>>>>>>> however I
>>>>>>>> would like if the fixes I've made make it into Syncope for 1.1. I
>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>> backport the CSV fixes to the branch. How about a new branch for the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> LDAP +
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> DB bundles that I can backport fixes to? In particular I would like
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> LDAP-2, LDAP-5 and LDAP-6 available in Syncope 1.1.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> OK Colm, probably we can do the following.
>>>>>>> Since I'd like to maintain the possibility to switch from a newest
>>>>>>> connector version to an old one I'd ask you to verify before the
>>>>>>> possibility to run, for example, CsvDir 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT with the
>>>>>>> latest
>>>>>>> framework version.
>>>>>>> If I well remember this should be possible (the opposite is not
>>>>>>> possible
>>>>>>> for sure). This would be sufficient to have my +1.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>> F.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Fabio Martelli
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <fa...@gmail.com>****wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Il giorno 19/feb/2013, alle ore 11.28, Colm O hEigeartaigh ha
>>>>>>>> scritto:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When using the CSVDir 0.7-SNAPSHOT we would be forced to use
>>>>>>>>> ConnId
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT instead of 1.3.2.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Is there any reason why we can't just do that on trunk anyway? I
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> assume
>>>>>>>>>> we're going to release Syncope 1.1 with ConnId 1.3.3 anyway?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Guys, I'd prefere to keep the 1.3.2 for Syncope 1.1.0.
>>>>>>>>> Since we are expecting to release soon I'd like to be sure about the
>>>>>>>>> reliability of the 1.1.0.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> F.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Why not backporting your fix on 0.7-SNAPSHOT to 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I will do.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Colm.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò <
>>>>>>>>>> ilgrosso@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 19/02/2013 11:13, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Following the query on the CSV SNAPSHOT in Syncope, just
>>>>>>>>>>>> wondering
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> why
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> we including 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT on trunk instead of 0.7-SNAPSHOT? The
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> former
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> does not include the fixes I made recently (in particular the
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> properties
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> file is in the wrong package name, and so the correct property keys
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> displayed in Syncope).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> When using the CSVDir 0.7-SNAPSHOT we would be forced to use
>>>>>>>>>>>> ConnId
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT instead of 1.3.2.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Why not backporting your fix on 0.7-SNAPSHOT to 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>> --
>>> Francesco Chicchiriccò
>>>
>>> ASF Member, Apache Syncope PMC chair, Apache Cocoon PMC Member
>>> http://people.apache.org/~**ilgrosso/<http://people.apache.org/~ilgrosso/>
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>> "connid-dev" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>>> email to connid-dev+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<co...@googlegroups.com>
>>> .
>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**group/connid-dev?hl=en-US<http://groups.google.com/group/connid-dev?hl=en-US>
>>> .
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out>
>>> .
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Colm O hEigeartaigh
>>
>> Talend Community Coder
>> http://coders.talend.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Colm O hEigeartaigh
>
> Talend Community Coder
> http://coders.talend.com
Re: [connid-dev] Re: CSV Connector SNAPSHOT version
Posted by Francesco Chicchiriccò <il...@apache.org>.
On 20/02/2013 13:28, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
>> I think that we can move Syncope 1.1.0 to ConnId 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT, thus avoid
>> branching.
> Any objections to me moving the Syncope trunk pom to use 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT,
> and the SNAPSHOT versions of the Connector bundles?
Not at all, go ahead.
Regards.
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Colm O hEigeartaigh <co...@apache.org>wrote:
>
>> Given the retro-compatibility feature reported above, if confirmed
>>> working, I think that we can move Syncope 1.1.0 to ConnId 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT,
>>> thus avoid branching.
>>>
>>> Sorry for not having made this re-thinking clear.
>>
>> Ah, ok got it, thanks.
>>
>> Colm.
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Francesco Chicchiriccò <
>> ilgrosso@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 19/02/2013 13:04, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Francesco,
>>>>
>>>> I thought we could avoid this branching if we are able to verify that
>>>>> you can use "old" (e.g. compiled against ConnId 1.3.2) connectors with "new"
>>>>> (e.g. 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT) framework,
>>>>>
>>>> Ok, I guess I misunderstood. I understand that we want to run an "old"
>>>> connector with the new framework, and so for example the CSV 0.6.x branch
>>>> should be able to run against the 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT framework version.
>>>>
>>>> I don't understand though how we can avoid branching DB + LDAP if we want
>>>> to have the fixes I mentioned available in Syncope 1.1?
>>>>
>>> Given the retro-compatibility feature reported above, if confirmed
>>> working, I think that we can move Syncope 1.1.0 to ConnId 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT,
>>> thus avoid branching.
>>>
>>> Sorry for not having made this re-thinking clear.
>>>
>>> Regards.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò <
>>>> ilgrosso@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 19/02/2013 12:51, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
>>>>> How about a new branch for the LDAP + DB bundles that I can backport
>>>>>>> fixes to?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In terms of the DB Connector first, trunk is at 2.1.5-SNAPSHOT. How
>>>>>> about
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> update trunk to 2.2-SNAPSHOT + create a new branch called "2.1.X" (with
>>>>>> version 2.1.5-SNAPSHOT) before the recent revisions were made? I will
>>>>>> then
>>>>>> selectively merge various fixes. Any objections to this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought we could avoid this branching if we are able to verify that
>>>>> you
>>>>> can use "old" (e.g. compiled against ConnId 1.3.2) connectors with "new"
>>>>> (e.g. 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT) framework,
>>>>>
>>>>> Am I wrong?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Fabio Martelli
>>>>>
>>>>>> <fa...@gmail.com>****wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Il giorno 19/feb/2013, alle ore 11.44, Colm O hEigeartaigh ha
>>>>>> scritto:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Guys, I'd prefere to keep the 1.3.2 for Syncope 1.1.0.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Since we are expecting to release soon I'd like to be sure about the
>>>>>>>>> reliability of the 1.1.0.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Why do you think 1.3.3 would be particularly unreliable? There
>>>>>>>> have not
>>>>>>>> been many fixes made from what I can see.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't have strong objections to using 1.3.2 for Syncope 1.1,
>>>>>>>> however I
>>>>>>>> would like if the fixes I've made make it into Syncope for 1.1. I
>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>> backport the CSV fixes to the branch. How about a new branch for the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> LDAP +
>>>>>>> DB bundles that I can backport fixes to? In particular I would like
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>> LDAP-2, LDAP-5 and LDAP-6 available in Syncope 1.1.
>>>>>>>> OK Colm, probably we can do the following.
>>>>>>> Since I'd like to maintain the possibility to switch from a newest
>>>>>>> connector version to an old one I'd ask you to verify before the
>>>>>>> possibility to run, for example, CsvDir 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT with the
>>>>>>> latest
>>>>>>> framework version.
>>>>>>> If I well remember this should be possible (the opposite is not
>>>>>>> possible
>>>>>>> for sure). This would be sufficient to have my +1.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>> F.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Fabio Martelli
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <fa...@gmail.com>****wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Il giorno 19/feb/2013, alle ore 11.28, Colm O hEigeartaigh ha
>>>>>>>> scritto:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When using the CSVDir 0.7-SNAPSHOT we would be forced to use
>>>>>>>>> ConnId
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT instead of 1.3.2.
>>>>>>>>>>> Is there any reason why we can't just do that on trunk anyway? I
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> assume
>>>>>>>>>> we're going to release Syncope 1.1 with ConnId 1.3.3 anyway?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Guys, I'd prefere to keep the 1.3.2 for Syncope 1.1.0.
>>>>>>>>> Since we are expecting to release soon I'd like to be sure about the
>>>>>>>>> reliability of the 1.1.0.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> F.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Why not backporting your fix on 0.7-SNAPSHOT to 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I will do.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Colm.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò <
>>>>>>>>>> ilgrosso@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 19/02/2013 11:13, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Following the query on the CSV SNAPSHOT in Syncope, just
>>>>>>>>>>>> wondering
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> why
>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>> we including 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT on trunk instead of 0.7-SNAPSHOT? The
>>>>>>>>>>> former
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> does not include the fixes I made recently (in particular the
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> properties
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> file is in the wrong package name, and so the correct property keys
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>> displayed in Syncope).
>>>>>>>>>>>> When using the CSVDir 0.7-SNAPSHOT we would be forced to use
>>>>>>>>>>>> ConnId
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT instead of 1.3.2.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Why not backporting your fix on 0.7-SNAPSHOT to 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> --
>>> Francesco Chicchiriccò
>>>
>>> ASF Member, Apache Syncope PMC chair, Apache Cocoon PMC Member
>>> http://people.apache.org/~**ilgrosso/<http://people.apache.org/~ilgrosso/>
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>> "connid-dev" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>>> email to connid-dev+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<co...@googlegroups.com>
>>> .
>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**group/connid-dev?hl=en-US<http://groups.google.com/group/connid-dev?hl=en-US>
>>> .
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out>
>>> .
--
Francesco Chicchiriccò
ASF Member, Apache Syncope PMC chair, Apache Cocoon PMC Member
http://people.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
Re: [connid-dev] Re: CSV Connector SNAPSHOT version
Posted by Colm O hEigeartaigh <co...@apache.org>.
> think that we can move Syncope 1.1.0 to ConnId 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT, thus avoid
> branching.
>
Any objections to me moving the Syncope trunk pom to use 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT,
and the SNAPSHOT versions of the Connector bundles?
Colm.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Colm O hEigeartaigh <co...@apache.org>wrote:
>
> Given the retro-compatibility feature reported above, if confirmed
>> working, I think that we can move Syncope 1.1.0 to ConnId 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT,
>> thus avoid branching.
>>
>> Sorry for not having made this re-thinking clear.
>
>
> Ah, ok got it, thanks.
>
> Colm.
>
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Francesco Chicchiriccò <
> ilgrosso@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On 19/02/2013 13:04, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Francesco,
>>>
>>> I thought we could avoid this branching if we are able to verify that
>>>> you can use "old" (e.g. compiled against ConnId 1.3.2) connectors with "new"
>>>> (e.g. 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT) framework,
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ok, I guess I misunderstood. I understand that we want to run an "old"
>>> connector with the new framework, and so for example the CSV 0.6.x branch
>>> should be able to run against the 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT framework version.
>>>
>>> I don't understand though how we can avoid branching DB + LDAP if we want
>>> to have the fixes I mentioned available in Syncope 1.1?
>>>
>>
>> Given the retro-compatibility feature reported above, if confirmed
>> working, I think that we can move Syncope 1.1.0 to ConnId 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT,
>> thus avoid branching.
>>
>> Sorry for not having made this re-thinking clear.
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò <
>>> ilgrosso@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 19/02/2013 12:51, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
>>>>
>>>> How about a new branch for the LDAP + DB bundles that I can backport
>>>>>
>>>>>> fixes to?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In terms of the DB Connector first, trunk is at 2.1.5-SNAPSHOT. How
>>>>> about
>>>>> I
>>>>> update trunk to 2.2-SNAPSHOT + create a new branch called "2.1.X" (with
>>>>> version 2.1.5-SNAPSHOT) before the recent revisions were made? I will
>>>>> then
>>>>> selectively merge various fixes. Any objections to this?
>>>>>
>>>>> I thought we could avoid this branching if we are able to verify that
>>>> you
>>>> can use "old" (e.g. compiled against ConnId 1.3.2) connectors with "new"
>>>> (e.g. 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT) framework,
>>>>
>>>> Am I wrong?
>>>>
>>>> Regards.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Fabio Martelli
>>>>
>>>>> <fa...@gmail.com>****wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Il giorno 19/feb/2013, alle ore 11.44, Colm O hEigeartaigh ha
>>>>> scritto:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Guys, I'd prefere to keep the 1.3.2 for Syncope 1.1.0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since we are expecting to release soon I'd like to be sure about the
>>>>>>>> reliability of the 1.1.0.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why do you think 1.3.3 would be particularly unreliable? There
>>>>>>> have not
>>>>>>> been many fixes made from what I can see.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't have strong objections to using 1.3.2 for Syncope 1.1,
>>>>>>> however I
>>>>>>> would like if the fixes I've made make it into Syncope for 1.1. I
>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>> backport the CSV fixes to the branch. How about a new branch for the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> LDAP +
>>>>>>
>>>>>> DB bundles that I can backport fixes to? In particular I would like
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>
>>>>>> LDAP-2, LDAP-5 and LDAP-6 available in Syncope 1.1.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OK Colm, probably we can do the following.
>>>>>> Since I'd like to maintain the possibility to switch from a newest
>>>>>> connector version to an old one I'd ask you to verify before the
>>>>>> possibility to run, for example, CsvDir 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT with the
>>>>>> latest
>>>>>> framework version.
>>>>>> If I well remember this should be possible (the opposite is not
>>>>>> possible
>>>>>> for sure). This would be sufficient to have my +1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>> F.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Fabio Martelli
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <fa...@gmail.com>****wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Il giorno 19/feb/2013, alle ore 11.28, Colm O hEigeartaigh ha
>>>>>>> scritto:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When using the CSVDir 0.7-SNAPSHOT we would be forced to use
>>>>>>>> ConnId
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT instead of 1.3.2.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Is there any reason why we can't just do that on trunk anyway? I
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> assume
>>>>>>>>> we're going to release Syncope 1.1 with ConnId 1.3.3 anyway?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Guys, I'd prefere to keep the 1.3.2 for Syncope 1.1.0.
>>>>>>>> Since we are expecting to release soon I'd like to be sure about the
>>>>>>>> reliability of the 1.1.0.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> F.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why not backporting your fix on 0.7-SNAPSHOT to 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I will do.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Colm.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò <
>>>>>>>>> ilgrosso@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 19/02/2013 11:13, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Following the query on the CSV SNAPSHOT in Syncope, just
>>>>>>>>>>> wondering
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> why
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> we including 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT on trunk instead of 0.7-SNAPSHOT? The
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> former
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> does not include the fixes I made recently (in particular the
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> properties
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> file is in the wrong package name, and so the correct property keys
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> displayed in Syncope).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> When using the CSVDir 0.7-SNAPSHOT we would be forced to use
>>>>>>>>>>> ConnId
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT instead of 1.3.2.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Why not backporting your fix on 0.7-SNAPSHOT to 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>> --
>> Francesco Chicchiriccò
>>
>> ASF Member, Apache Syncope PMC chair, Apache Cocoon PMC Member
>> http://people.apache.org/~**ilgrosso/<http://people.apache.org/~ilgrosso/>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "connid-dev" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to connid-dev+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<co...@googlegroups.com>
>> .
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**group/connid-dev?hl=en-US<http://groups.google.com/group/connid-dev?hl=en-US>
>> .
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out>
>> .
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Colm O hEigeartaigh
>
> Talend Community Coder
> http://coders.talend.com
>
--
Colm O hEigeartaigh
Talend Community Coder
http://coders.talend.com