You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de> on 2003/08/07 09:44:12 UTC
[QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
I just wanted to check what the general feeling for the final
release date of 2.1 is.
I think we can either release next week (12th) or the week after
(19th).
I prefer the 12th and don't think that we need one more week. We
can make a 2.1.1 were easy anyway.
So, to make this thread easier, please only speak up if you think
that the 19th is better and give a short reason.
Thanks
Carsten
Re: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
Posted by Gianugo Rabellino <gi...@apache.org>.
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> I just wanted to check what the general feeling for the final
> release date of 2.1 is.
>
> I think we can either release next week (12th) or the week after
> (19th).
>
> I prefer the 12th and don't think that we need one more week. We
> can make a 2.1.1 were easy anyway.
>
> So, to make this thread easier, please only speak up if you think
> that the 19th is better and give a short reason.
My personal point is having the TraversableGenerator in the main trunk.
The discussion didn't really solve the issues, so I'm about to propose a
vote and see what happens. Other than that, I'm fine with releasing on
the 12th.
Ciao,
--
Gianugo Rabellino
Pro-netics s.r.l. - http://www.pro-netics.com
Orixo, the XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
(Now blogging at: http://blogs.cocoondev.org/gianugo/)
RE: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
Posted by Reinhard Pötz <re...@gmx.net>.
From: Carsten Ziegeler
> - removing old FOM (reported by Bruno) : If I followed the
> changes correctly,
> this has been fixed, right?
The old implementation is still there but I commented it out in
cocoon.xconf. All examples (thanks to Ugo, he ported Linotype) should
use the FOM based interpreter.
Reinhard
Re: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@codeconsult.ch>.
Le Mardi, 12 aoû 2003, à 09:05 Europe/Zurich, Carsten Ziegeler a écrit :
> ...Joerg did commit the changes, I did some additions. Can this now be
> assumed as fixed?
Just saw a small typo in README.txt, I'll commit in a few minutes...
-Bertrand
RE: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de>.
Thanks!
Carsten
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven Noels [mailto:stevenn@outerthought.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 11:39 AM
> To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
>
>
> On 12/08/2003 11:24 Steven Noels wrote:
>
> > I'm CVS updating as we speak and will finish this before noon (Europe
> > time).
>
> Done - please cross-check.
>
> </Steven>
> --
> Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
> Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
> Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
> stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
>
Re: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
On 12/08/2003 11:24 Steven Noels wrote:
> I'm CVS updating as we speak and will finish this before noon (Europe
> time).
Done - please cross-check.
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
Re: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
On 12/08/2003 10:22 Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> Reinhard Pötz wrote:
>
>>Shouldn't this text be part of the website and the documentation
>>(src\documentation\xdocs\index.xml)?
>>
>
> Yes, can someone take care of it.
>
> Note: I didn't start the release process yet, so there is enough time.
I'm CVS updating as we speak and will finish this before noon (Europe time).
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
RE: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de>.
Reinhard Pötz wrote:
> Shouldn't this text be part of the website and the documentation
> (src\documentation\xdocs\index.xml)?
>
Yes, can someone take care of it.
Note: I didn't start the release process yet, so there is enough time.
Carsten
RE: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
Posted by Reinhard Pötz <re...@gmx.net>.
From: Carsten Ziegeler
> Steven Noels wrote:
> >
> > On 11/08/2003 15:16 Reinhard Pötz wrote:
> >
> > > Last week there were some mails about a new (and better)
> description
> > > of Cocoon that reflects that it is a Web Application
> framework too.
> > > Is it already included into the documentation (first
> page) and the
> > > site CVS?
> >
> > I don't think so - but the discussion was on the list. I can't look
> > into this before tomorrow, so if anyone would check the
> archives and
> > change accordingly, that would be great.
> >
> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=106010158816970&w=2
> >
> Joerg did commit the changes, I did some additions. Can this
> now be assumed as fixed?
Shouldn't this text be part of the website and the documentation
(src\documentation\xdocs\index.xml)?
Reinhard
RE: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de>.
Steven Noels wrote:
>
> On 11/08/2003 15:16 Reinhard Pötz wrote:
>
> > Last week there were some mails about a new (and better) description of
> > Cocoon that reflects that it is a Web Application framework too. Is it
> > already included into the documentation (first page) and the site CVS?
>
> I don't think so - but the discussion was on the list. I can't look into
> this before tomorrow, so if anyone would check the archives and change
> accordingly, that would be great.
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=106010158816970&w=2
>
Joerg did commit the changes, I did some additions. Can this now be
assumed as fixed?
Carsten
Re: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
On 11/08/2003 15:16 Reinhard Pötz wrote:
> Last week there were some mails about a new (and better) description of
> Cocoon that reflects that it is a Web Application framework too. Is it
> already included into the documentation (first page) and the site CVS?
I don't think so - but the discussion was on the list. I can't look into
this before tomorrow, so if anyone would check the archives and change
accordingly, that would be great.
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=106010158816970&w=2
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
RE: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
Posted by Reinhard Pötz <re...@gmx.net>.
Last week there were some mails about a new (and better) description of
Cocoon that reflects that it is a Web Application framework too. Is it
already included into the documentation (first page) and the site CVS?
Reinhard
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carsten Ziegeler [mailto:cziegeler@s-und-n.de]
> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 2:53 PM
> To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
>
>
> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> >
> > Ok, it seems we have some minor open issues for the release
> tomorrow.
> >
> > Open issues (as reported):
> > - bug 9835 : seems to be fixed (Thanks to Sylvain), if noone comes
> > up by tomorrow, we can set assume it fixed.
>
> We should set it to fixed tonight.
>
> > - removing old FOM (reported by Bruno) : If I followed the changes
> > correctly,
> > this has been fixed, right?
>
> It's not removed but disabled (thanks Reinhard).
>
> > - TraversableGenerator (Gianugo) : What's the status? I think it
> > doesn't prevent
> > us from releasing.
>
> No showstopper.
>
> > - EventCacheImpl : It's currently the default if included.
> This should
> > be changed
> > for the release, I think
> >
> Fixed.
>
> So, now showstoppers => release tomorrow.
>
> Carsten
>
RE: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de>.
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>
> Ok, it seems we have some minor open issues for the release tomorrow.
>
> Open issues (as reported):
> - bug 9835 : seems to be fixed (Thanks to Sylvain), if noone comes
> up by tomorrow, we can set assume it fixed.
We should set it to fixed tonight.
> - removing old FOM (reported by Bruno) : If I followed the changes
> correctly,
> this has been fixed, right?
It's not removed but disabled (thanks Reinhard).
> - TraversableGenerator (Gianugo) : What's the status? I think it doesn't
> prevent
> us from releasing.
No showstopper.
> - EventCacheImpl : It's currently the default if included. This should be
> changed
> for the release, I think
>
Fixed.
So, now showstoppers => release tomorrow.
Carsten
RE: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de>.
Ok, it seems we have some minor open issues for the release tomorrow.
Open issues (as reported):
- bug 9835 : seems to be fixed (Thanks to Sylvain), if noone comes
up by tomorrow, we can set assume it fixed.
- removing old FOM (reported by Bruno) : If I followed the changes
correctly,
this has been fixed, right?
- TraversableGenerator (Gianugo) : What's the status? I think it doesn't
prevent
us from releasing.
- EventCacheImpl : It's currently the default if included. This should be
changed
for the release, I think
Is it possible to have closed the open issues from above until
tomorrow?
Thanks
Carsten
Re: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
Posted by Bruno Dumon <br...@outerthought.org>.
On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 11:16, Ugo Cei wrote:
> Bruno Dumon wrote:
> > I'm fine with either, but one thing that IMO still needs to be done
> > prior to release is remove the old FOM. It is however still used in a
> > few places (xmlform, linotype). People who will use that code as an
> > example for doing their own stuff will end up using the unsupported API.
>
> I have a working port of Linotype to the new FOM, *BUT* it requires
> adding a getRealPath method to cocoon.context. Since this method wasn't
> included in the FOM proposal, I haven't included it, but it's a one-liner.
>
> I could either add it right away and commit the modified Linotype
> implementation tonight, or we could call a vote, but in that case I
> won't be able to commit it until September (leaving tomorrow for summer
> vacations). Alternatively, I could post a patch to bugzilla.
There's still a third option: use a Java-class to retrieve the realpath,
which is currently the best solution IMO.
I've attached just such a class, put it next to the other linotype java
sources, and then use the following in the flowscript:
defineClass("org.apache.cocoon.components.Linotype");
var home = new Linotype().getRepositoryHome() + "samples/linotype/";
I don't know anything about linotype, but maybe this fits better into
the existing Repository class, so that the actual realpath is never used
in the flowscript itself.
--
Bruno Dumon http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
bruno@outerthought.org bruno@apache.org
Re: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
Posted by Ugo Cei <u....@cbim.it>.
Bruno Dumon wrote:
> I'm fine with either, but one thing that IMO still needs to be done
> prior to release is remove the old FOM. It is however still used in a
> few places (xmlform, linotype). People who will use that code as an
> example for doing their own stuff will end up using the unsupported API.
I have a working port of Linotype to the new FOM, *BUT* it requires
adding a getRealPath method to cocoon.context. Since this method wasn't
included in the FOM proposal, I haven't included it, but it's a one-liner.
I could either add it right away and commit the modified Linotype
implementation tonight, or we could call a vote, but in that case I
won't be able to commit it until September (leaving tomorrow for summer
vacations). Alternatively, I could post a patch to bugzilla.
Ugo
--
Ugo Cei - Consorzio di Bioingegneria e Informatica Medica
P.le Volontari del Sangue, 2 - 27100 Pavia - Italy
Phone: +39.0382.525100 - E-mail: u.cei@cbim.it
RE: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de>.
Bruno Dumon wrote:
> I'm fine with either, but one thing that IMO still needs to be done
> prior to release is remove the old FOM. It is however still used in a
> few places (xmlform, linotype). People who will use that code as an
> example for doing their own stuff will end up using the unsupported API.
> Or maybe we could simply add a big warning on top of the .js files, if
> nobody wants to update that code right now.
>
Good point! Ok, I think we should remove the old code before the release.
Can someone do this please?
Carsten
RE: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
Posted by Reinhard Pötz <re...@gmx.net>.
From: Bruno Dumon
> On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 09:44, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> > I just wanted to check what the general feeling for the
> final release
> > date of 2.1 is.
> >
> > I think we can either release next week (12th) or the week after
> > (19th).
> >
> > I prefer the 12th and don't think that we need one more
> week. We can
> > make a 2.1.1 were easy anyway.
> >
> > So, to make this thread easier, please only speak up if you
> think that
> > the 19th is better and give a short reason.
>
> I'm fine with either, but one thing that IMO still needs to
> be done prior to release is remove the old FOM. It is however
> still used in a few places (xmlform, linotype). People who
Xmlforms has been deprecated in favour of JXForms. It is only
necessary to support users who have build their applications around
it. So I
- create a "deprecated blocks" section in blocks.properties
- uncommented the flow examples in XMLForms
- uncommented the non-FOM flow implementation
After commenting out the non-FOM flow interpreter Linotype is
broken. As it is an unstable block it shouldn't matter.
IIRC Ugo has already started updating Linotype using FOM but I
don't know how far he has come. I think he had some problems
with a method not available in the context object.
Cheers,
Reinhard
Re: [QUICK-VOTE] Release Date for 2.1 final
Posted by Bruno Dumon <br...@outerthought.org>.
On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 09:44, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> I just wanted to check what the general feeling for the final
> release date of 2.1 is.
>
> I think we can either release next week (12th) or the week after
> (19th).
>
> I prefer the 12th and don't think that we need one more week. We
> can make a 2.1.1 were easy anyway.
>
> So, to make this thread easier, please only speak up if you think
> that the 19th is better and give a short reason.
I'm fine with either, but one thing that IMO still needs to be done
prior to release is remove the old FOM. It is however still used in a
few places (xmlform, linotype). People who will use that code as an
example for doing their own stuff will end up using the unsupported API.
Or maybe we could simply add a big warning on top of the .js files, if
nobody wants to update that code right now.
--
Bruno Dumon http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
bruno@outerthought.org bruno@apache.org