You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@isis.apache.org by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> on 2011/04/22 10:56:19 UTC
Fw: thinking about a release
Rethinking a bit, I actually don't see anything which cannot be discussed on the public list anyway.
So c'mon folks, wdyt? We need our feedback :)
LieGrue,
strub
--- On Fri, 4/22/11, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> From: Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>
> Subject: thinking about a release
> To: isis-private@incubator.apache.org
> Date: Friday, April 22, 2011, 7:23 AM
> Hi folks!
>
>
> I peaked over the sources a little bit (still don't have
> much clue) and it doesn't look that bad imo.
>
> What about thinking off a new isis 0.9.0-incubating
> release?
>
> We did this 0.9 version scheme in a few other projects
> which are already close to 1.0 to show it's not _yet_ 1.0
> but already quite near.
>
> The fact that we have a incubator release out there is
> pretty important for the adoption rate sometimes.
>
> WDYT?
>
> This of course will need a bit of preparation:
>
>
> 1.) re-check the IP clearance. Especially our 3rd party
> dependencies. Even an incubator release must meet our
> license requirements. E.g. use specs from http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/geronimo/specs/
> instead of any javax.* or org.hibernate.* maven artifacts if
> possible.
>
> 2.) We better not need any 3rd party <repositories>.
> If we have such a thing, then we should look if there are
> any alternatives. That's no hard show stopper but generally
> a good idea to look at
>
> 3.) Go through all open jira issues and identify show
> stopper issues.
>
> 4.) create a new isis-0.9.0 'Version' in Jira and move all
> bugs to 'fixed in isis-0.9.0' in Jira.
>
> Anything I forgot?
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
Re: thinking about a release
Posted by Mike Burton <mi...@mycosystems.co.uk>.
I'd very much like to see a release, what would you add to / cut from Dan's
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ISIS-20https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ISIS-20 ?
Best Regards
Mike Burton
( iPhone)
.
On 22 Apr 2011, at 14:26, "Kevin Meyer - KMZ" <ke...@kmz.co.za> wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> I get the impression that most of (Dan's) hesistation has been about
> the documentation.. we don't want to lose potential interest because of
> this..
>
> Having said that, what do the people who have joined more recently
> have to say? Sabine, Michael, Vangjel, etc?
>
> Kevin
>
>
> On 22 Apr 2011 at 9:56, Mark Struberg wrote:
>
>
>>> Hi folks!
>>>
>>>
>>> I peaked over the sources a little bit (still don't have
>>> much clue) and it doesn't look that bad imo.
>>>
>>> What about thinking off a new isis 0.9.0-incubating
>>> release?
>>>
>>> We did this 0.9 version scheme in a few other projects
>>> which are already close to 1.0 to show it's not _yet_ 1.0
>>> but already quite near.
>>>
>>> The fact that we have a incubator release out there is
>>> pretty important for the adoption rate sometimes.
>>>
>>> WDYT?
>>>
>>> This of course will need a bit of preparation:
>>>
>>>
>>> 1.) re-check the IP clearance. Especially our 3rd party
>>> dependencies. Even an incubator release must meet our
>>> license requirements. E.g. use specs from http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/geronimo/specs/
>>> instead of any javax.* or org.hibernate.* maven artifacts if
>>> possible.
>>>
>>> 2.) We better not need any 3rd party <repositories>.
>>> If we have such a thing, then we should look if there are
>>> any alternatives. That's no hard show stopper but generally
>>> a good idea to look at
>>>
>>> 3.) Go through all open jira issues and identify show
>>> stopper issues.
>>>
>>> 4.) create a new isis-0.9.0 'Version' in Jira and move all
>>> bugs to 'fixed in isis-0.9.0' in Jira.
>>>
>>> Anything I forgot?
>>>
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>>
>
>
Re: thinking about a release
Posted by Dan Haywood <dk...@gmail.com>.
Hi all,
Yes, I have just been wanting to chip away at the documentation - as the
various commits will attest.
Also, I can see both Rob and Kevin are steadily making improvements, so
there's ongoing work there, so didn't want to unnecessarily break the flow.
But I'm happy to put together a release if that's what people want.
What I propose is:
1. I'll just finish the core docs (should be done in next days or two)
2. make sure that the copyright and other stuff is ok for the remaining
modules
3. update the JIRAs so capture the fact that documentation for some of
the other modules is not complete (most notably, we only have a
placeholder for the default runtime [oai.runtimes:dflt] module).
4. I'll check-in with Rob and Kevin to make sure that we choose a
suitable point to take the tag.
Then I'll start looking into what makes up a release.
In terms of Mark's questions:
/1.) re-check the IP clearance. Especially our 3rd party/
/dependencies. Even an incubator release must meet our/
/license requirements. E.g. use specs from
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/geronimo/specs//
/instead of any javax.* or org.hibernate.* maven artifacts. /
We won't have dependencies on org.hibernate, but we might be depending on some javax. stuff. They should all be in isis-parent pom.xml, so perhaps someone could take a look?
/2.) We better not need any 3rd party <repositories>.
If we have such a thing, then we should look if there are
any alternatives. That's no hard show stopper but generally
a good idea to look at
/
We do have a dependency in the restful view on JBoss, but that stuff is
all Apache license v2.
/3.) Go through all open jira issues and identify show
stopper issues.
/
I don't think there are any, but I'll check.
/4.) create a new isis-0.9.0 'Version' in Jira and move all
bugs to 'fixed in isis-0.9.0' in Jira.
/
I've been working on 0.1.2-SNAPSHOT, but I can rename to 0.9.0 if you
recommend it. I do actually have 0.2.0 and 0.3.0 releases planned with
some tickets assigned to them, but they can easily be renamed too if
required.
Cheers
Dan
~~~~~
On 22/04/2011 14:26, Kevin Meyer - KMZ wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> I get the impression that most of (Dan's) hesistation has been about
> the documentation.. we don't want to lose potential interest because of
> this..
>
> Having said that, what do the people who have joined more recently
> have to say? Sabine, Michael, Vangjel, etc?
>
> Kevin
>
>
> On 22 Apr 2011 at 9:56, Mark Struberg wrote:
>
>
>>> Hi folks!
>>>
>>>
>>> I peaked over the sources a little bit (still don't have
>>> much clue) and it doesn't look that bad imo.
>>>
>>> What about thinking off a new isis 0.9.0-incubating
>>> release?
>>>
>>> We did this 0.9 version scheme in a few other projects
>>> which are already close to 1.0 to show it's not _yet_ 1.0
>>> but already quite near.
>>>
>>> The fact that we have a incubator release out there is
>>> pretty important for the adoption rate sometimes.
>>>
>>> WDYT?
>>>
>>> This of course will need a bit of preparation:
>>>
>>>
>>> 1.) re-check the IP clearance. Especially our 3rd party
>>> dependencies. Even an incubator release must meet our
>>> license requirements. E.g. use specs from http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/geronimo/specs/
>>> instead of any javax.* or org.hibernate.* maven artifacts if
>>> possible.
>>>
>>> 2.) We better not need any 3rd party<repositories>.
>>> If we have such a thing, then we should look if there are
>>> any alternatives. That's no hard show stopper but generally
>>> a good idea to look at
>>>
>>> 3.) Go through all open jira issues and identify show
>>> stopper issues.
>>>
>>> 4.) create a new isis-0.9.0 'Version' in Jira and move all
>>> bugs to 'fixed in isis-0.9.0' in Jira.
>>>
>>> Anything I forgot?
>>>
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>>
>
>
Re: thinking about a release
Posted by Kevin Meyer - KMZ <ke...@kmz.co.za>.
Hi Mark,
I get the impression that most of (Dan's) hesistation has been about
the documentation.. we don't want to lose potential interest because of
this..
Having said that, what do the people who have joined more recently
have to say? Sabine, Michael, Vangjel, etc?
Kevin
On 22 Apr 2011 at 9:56, Mark Struberg wrote:
> > Hi folks!
> >
> >
> > I peaked over the sources a little bit (still don't have
> > much clue) and it doesn't look that bad imo.
> >
> > What about thinking off a new isis 0.9.0-incubating
> > release?
> >
> > We did this 0.9 version scheme in a few other projects
> > which are already close to 1.0 to show it's not _yet_ 1.0
> > but already quite near.
> >
> > The fact that we have a incubator release out there is
> > pretty important for the adoption rate sometimes.
> >
> > WDYT?
> >
> > This of course will need a bit of preparation:
> >
> >
> > 1.) re-check the IP clearance. Especially our 3rd party
> > dependencies. Even an incubator release must meet our
> > license requirements. E.g. use specs from http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/geronimo/specs/
> > instead of any javax.* or org.hibernate.* maven artifacts if
> > possible.
> >
> > 2.) We better not need any 3rd party <repositories>.
> > If we have such a thing, then we should look if there are
> > any alternatives. That's no hard show stopper but generally
> > a good idea to look at
> >
> > 3.) Go through all open jira issues and identify show
> > stopper issues.
> >
> > 4.) create a new isis-0.9.0 'Version' in Jira and move all
> > bugs to 'fixed in isis-0.9.0' in Jira.
> >
> > Anything I forgot?
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >