You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to kerby@directory.apache.org by "Zheng, Kai" <ka...@intel.com> on 2017/08/18 05:25:30 UTC
Kerby 1.0.1 release
IMO we should go for the 1.0.1 release since the previous 1.0.0 major release had passed some time. The minor release did fix some important bugs and we should suggest users use this minor release instead.
Are there any critical issues we want to target for the minor release?
Kerby users/committers, any comment? Thanks!
Regards,
Kai
-----Original Message-----
From: Li, Jiajia [mailto:jiajia.li@intel.com]
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2017 11:32 AM
To: kerby@directory.apache.org
Subject: Kerby new minor release
Hi all,
After Kerby 1.0.0 released, 12 issues were resolved, including following bug fix and improvement:
Fix the issue not compatible with MIT Kerberos: DIRKRB-614<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-614>, DIRKRB-631<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-631>;
Fix the network related issue: DIRKRB-629<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-629>;
And with some improvements in token preauth and kinit;
I suggest we can make the new minor release. How do you think about it?
Thanks,
Jiajia
RE: Kerby 1.0.1 release
Posted by "Li, Jiajia" <ji...@intel.com>.
Hi Colm,
It's great if you could take this work.
Thanks,
Jiajia
-----Original Message-----
From: Colm O hEigeartaigh [mailto:coheigea@apache.org]
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2017 5:15 PM
To: kerby@directory.apache.org
Subject: Re: Kerby 1.0.1 release
Yes, let's get 1.0.1 done. Will I take care of calling the vote, or does someone else want to do it?
Colm.
On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Gerard Gagliano <ge...@prodentity.com>
wrote:
> Agreed, 1.0.1
>
> --
> > On Aug 17, 2017, at 11:25 PM, Zheng, Kai <ka...@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > IMO we should go for the 1.0.1 release since the previous 1.0.0
> > major
> release had passed some time. The minor release did fix some important
> bugs and we should suggest users use this minor release instead.
> >
> > Are there any critical issues we want to target for the minor release?
> >
> > Kerby users/committers, any comment? Thanks!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Kai
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Li, Jiajia [mailto:jiajia.li@intel.com]
> > Sent: Friday, August 18, 2017 11:32 AM
> > To: kerby@directory.apache.org
> > Subject: Kerby new minor release
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > After Kerby 1.0.0 released, 12 issues were resolved, including
> > following
> bug fix and improvement:
> > Fix the issue not compatible with MIT Kerberos: DIRKRB-614<
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-614>, DIRKRB-631<
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-631>;
> > Fix the network related issue: DIRKRB-629<https://issues.
> apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-629>;
> > And with some improvements in token preauth and kinit;
> >
> > I suggest we can make the new minor release. How do you think about it?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jiajia
> >
> >
> >
>
>
--
Colm O hEigeartaigh
Talend Community Coder
http://coders.talend.com
Re: Kerby 1.0.1 release
Posted by Stefan Seelmann <ma...@stefan-seelmann.de>.
Ah, great, missed that.
On 08/28/2017 07:47 PM, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
> Thanks Stefan. There is a JIRA to track it here already:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-647
>
> Colm.
>
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 6:44 PM, Stefan Seelmann <ma...@stefan-seelmann.de>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Kerby folks,
>>
>> just in case you are not subscribed to notifications@d.a.o (you should
>> subscribe), the Kerby Jenkins jobs [1][]2 fail for some weeks now. Cause
>> is a compilation failure, KeyTab.getPrincipal() was only added in JDK8
>> but the build still is configured to use JDK7.
>>
>> So either
>> * Change the code if you want to keep Java 7 compatibiliy for 1.0.x
>> * Change Jenkins job and source/target level in pom.xml to Java 8
>>
>> Your call :)
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>> Stefan
>>
>> [1] https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Directory/job/dir-kerby/
>> [2] https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Directory/job/
>> dir-kerby-openjdk/
>>
>> On 08/28/2017 11:15 AM, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
>>> Yes, let's get 1.0.1 done. Will I take care of calling the vote, or does
>>> someone else want to do it?
>>>
>>> Colm.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Gerard Gagliano <gerardg@prodentity.com
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Agreed, 1.0.1
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>> On Aug 17, 2017, at 11:25 PM, Zheng, Kai <ka...@intel.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> IMO we should go for the 1.0.1 release since the previous 1.0.0 major
>>>> release had passed some time. The minor release did fix some important
>> bugs
>>>> and we should suggest users use this minor release instead.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are there any critical issues we want to target for the minor release?
>>>>>
>>>>> Kerby users/committers, any comment? Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Kai
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Li, Jiajia [mailto:jiajia.li@intel.com]
>>>>> Sent: Friday, August 18, 2017 11:32 AM
>>>>> To: kerby@directory.apache.org
>>>>> Subject: Kerby new minor release
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> After Kerby 1.0.0 released, 12 issues were resolved, including
>> following
>>>> bug fix and improvement:
>>>>> Fix the issue not compatible with MIT Kerberos: DIRKRB-614<
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-614>, DIRKRB-631<
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-631>;
>>>>> Fix the network related issue: DIRKRB-629<https://issues.
>>>> apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-629>;
>>>>> And with some improvements in token preauth and kinit;
>>>>>
>>>>> I suggest we can make the new minor release. How do you think about it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Jiajia
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Kerby 1.0.1 release
Posted by Colm O hEigeartaigh <co...@apache.org>.
Thanks Stefan. There is a JIRA to track it here already:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-647
Colm.
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 6:44 PM, Stefan Seelmann <ma...@stefan-seelmann.de>
wrote:
> Hi Kerby folks,
>
> just in case you are not subscribed to notifications@d.a.o (you should
> subscribe), the Kerby Jenkins jobs [1][]2 fail for some weeks now. Cause
> is a compilation failure, KeyTab.getPrincipal() was only added in JDK8
> but the build still is configured to use JDK7.
>
> So either
> * Change the code if you want to keep Java 7 compatibiliy for 1.0.x
> * Change Jenkins job and source/target level in pom.xml to Java 8
>
> Your call :)
>
> Kind Regards,
> Stefan
>
> [1] https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Directory/job/dir-kerby/
> [2] https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Directory/job/
> dir-kerby-openjdk/
>
> On 08/28/2017 11:15 AM, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
> > Yes, let's get 1.0.1 done. Will I take care of calling the vote, or does
> > someone else want to do it?
> >
> > Colm.
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Gerard Gagliano <gerardg@prodentity.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Agreed, 1.0.1
> >>
> >> --
> >>> On Aug 17, 2017, at 11:25 PM, Zheng, Kai <ka...@intel.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> IMO we should go for the 1.0.1 release since the previous 1.0.0 major
> >> release had passed some time. The minor release did fix some important
> bugs
> >> and we should suggest users use this minor release instead.
> >>>
> >>> Are there any critical issues we want to target for the minor release?
> >>>
> >>> Kerby users/committers, any comment? Thanks!
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Kai
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Li, Jiajia [mailto:jiajia.li@intel.com]
> >>> Sent: Friday, August 18, 2017 11:32 AM
> >>> To: kerby@directory.apache.org
> >>> Subject: Kerby new minor release
> >>>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> After Kerby 1.0.0 released, 12 issues were resolved, including
> following
> >> bug fix and improvement:
> >>> Fix the issue not compatible with MIT Kerberos: DIRKRB-614<
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-614>, DIRKRB-631<
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-631>;
> >>> Fix the network related issue: DIRKRB-629<https://issues.
> >> apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-629>;
> >>> And with some improvements in token preauth and kinit;
> >>>
> >>> I suggest we can make the new minor release. How do you think about it?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Jiajia
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
--
Colm O hEigeartaigh
Talend Community Coder
http://coders.talend.com
Re: Kerby 1.0.1 release
Posted by Stefan Seelmann <ma...@stefan-seelmann.de>.
Hi Kerby folks,
just in case you are not subscribed to notifications@d.a.o (you should
subscribe), the Kerby Jenkins jobs [1][]2 fail for some weeks now. Cause
is a compilation failure, KeyTab.getPrincipal() was only added in JDK8
but the build still is configured to use JDK7.
So either
* Change the code if you want to keep Java 7 compatibiliy for 1.0.x
* Change Jenkins job and source/target level in pom.xml to Java 8
Your call :)
Kind Regards,
Stefan
[1] https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Directory/job/dir-kerby/
[2] https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Directory/job/dir-kerby-openjdk/
On 08/28/2017 11:15 AM, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
> Yes, let's get 1.0.1 done. Will I take care of calling the vote, or does
> someone else want to do it?
>
> Colm.
>
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Gerard Gagliano <ge...@prodentity.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Agreed, 1.0.1
>>
>> --
>>> On Aug 17, 2017, at 11:25 PM, Zheng, Kai <ka...@intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> IMO we should go for the 1.0.1 release since the previous 1.0.0 major
>> release had passed some time. The minor release did fix some important bugs
>> and we should suggest users use this minor release instead.
>>>
>>> Are there any critical issues we want to target for the minor release?
>>>
>>> Kerby users/committers, any comment? Thanks!
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Kai
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Li, Jiajia [mailto:jiajia.li@intel.com]
>>> Sent: Friday, August 18, 2017 11:32 AM
>>> To: kerby@directory.apache.org
>>> Subject: Kerby new minor release
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> After Kerby 1.0.0 released, 12 issues were resolved, including following
>> bug fix and improvement:
>>> Fix the issue not compatible with MIT Kerberos: DIRKRB-614<
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-614>, DIRKRB-631<
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-631>;
>>> Fix the network related issue: DIRKRB-629<https://issues.
>> apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-629>;
>>> And with some improvements in token preauth and kinit;
>>>
>>> I suggest we can make the new minor release. How do you think about it?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jiajia
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Kerby 1.0.1 release
Posted by Colm O hEigeartaigh <co...@apache.org>.
Yes, let's get 1.0.1 done. Will I take care of calling the vote, or does
someone else want to do it?
Colm.
On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Gerard Gagliano <ge...@prodentity.com>
wrote:
> Agreed, 1.0.1
>
> --
> > On Aug 17, 2017, at 11:25 PM, Zheng, Kai <ka...@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > IMO we should go for the 1.0.1 release since the previous 1.0.0 major
> release had passed some time. The minor release did fix some important bugs
> and we should suggest users use this minor release instead.
> >
> > Are there any critical issues we want to target for the minor release?
> >
> > Kerby users/committers, any comment? Thanks!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Kai
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Li, Jiajia [mailto:jiajia.li@intel.com]
> > Sent: Friday, August 18, 2017 11:32 AM
> > To: kerby@directory.apache.org
> > Subject: Kerby new minor release
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > After Kerby 1.0.0 released, 12 issues were resolved, including following
> bug fix and improvement:
> > Fix the issue not compatible with MIT Kerberos: DIRKRB-614<
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-614>, DIRKRB-631<
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-631>;
> > Fix the network related issue: DIRKRB-629<https://issues.
> apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-629>;
> > And with some improvements in token preauth and kinit;
> >
> > I suggest we can make the new minor release. How do you think about it?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jiajia
> >
> >
> >
>
>
--
Colm O hEigeartaigh
Talend Community Coder
http://coders.talend.com
Re: Kerby 1.0.1 release
Posted by Gerard Gagliano <ge...@prodentity.com>.
Agreed, 1.0.1
--
> On Aug 17, 2017, at 11:25 PM, Zheng, Kai <ka...@intel.com> wrote:
>
> IMO we should go for the 1.0.1 release since the previous 1.0.0 major release had passed some time. The minor release did fix some important bugs and we should suggest users use this minor release instead.
>
> Are there any critical issues we want to target for the minor release?
>
> Kerby users/committers, any comment? Thanks!
>
> Regards,
> Kai
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Li, Jiajia [mailto:jiajia.li@intel.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 18, 2017 11:32 AM
> To: kerby@directory.apache.org
> Subject: Kerby new minor release
>
> Hi all,
>
> After Kerby 1.0.0 released, 12 issues were resolved, including following bug fix and improvement:
> Fix the issue not compatible with MIT Kerberos: DIRKRB-614<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-614>, DIRKRB-631<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-631>;
> Fix the network related issue: DIRKRB-629<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRKRB-629>;
> And with some improvements in token preauth and kinit;
>
> I suggest we can make the new minor release. How do you think about it?
>
> Thanks,
> Jiajia
>
>
>