Possible inclusions for RC3? Act now...

[Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>]

So, I have changed my mind about incorporating updates to RC2 to fix the
mostly documentation-related issues noted thus far; in the interests of
these changes actually getting made sooner rather than later (e.g. let's say
the 0.10 RC stages :P), I will produce RC3 later in the week to incorporate
such updates if they are made. Quid pro quo people.

I include a summary list below of possible changes to the RC's mentioned to
date for people familiar with the affected areas to action. I will update
the Java client/example readme.

Regards,
Robbie



>From Steve:

QPID-2948: Generated API docs have extraneous macro names in method
signatures


>From Alan:

There's an out of date RELEASE_NOTES file from the M4 release. Do we
overwrite 
that each time or do we have a better way of getting release notes (e.g.
from 
JIRAs)? It is referred to by README.txt so if we remove it we need to update
that.

examples/README.txt had inconsistent line endings, I checked in a fix on 0.8

branch & trunk

examples/qmf_agent is missing. Its there in the source tree but is missing
the 
makefile magic to put it in the package.

examples/qmf_console has no documentation in README.txt



>From Jonathan:

File: qpid-0.8.tar.gz

###./qpid-0.8 directory:

No README.txt or INSTALL in the top-level directory. The user needs an 
overview that describes which directories contain which component, and 
points to README.txt and INSTALL in those directories.

### ./qpid-0.8/cpp directory:

README.txt contains a "Quick Start" that doesn't work, because there is 
no configure file:

We do ship configure with the cpp distribution.

### ./qpid-0.8/cpp/examples directory:

Do we want to continue to ship the old API examples, with no indication 
that these are using the older API? I would remove them or at least put 
them in a subdirectory with a name that indicates they do not use the 
current API.


The Java client README.txt includes instructions explaining how to run 
the broker and not how to build and run the examples.



>From Chuck/Me:

.Net bindings are not called out specifically, and are only included in the
'full release' archive.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project:      http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org

Made changes for RC3? Please verify them by 6pm GMT, 23rd Nov...

[Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>]

I have just spent some time making updates for inclusion in 0.8 RC3, and
also merging across changes from trunk by others that I believe are intended
for inclusion in RC3 but have thus far not been merged. The
0.8-release-candidates branch as it stands now (r1037942) is what RC3 will
currently be produced from.

I will now be producing RC3 tomorrow, Tuesday 23rd, at 6pm GMT. If you have
made changes you expect to be included and didn't already merge them across
yourself, please check that I have caught them. If I missed anything or you
make other changes for consideration, please email me the trunk commit
revisions so I can consider them.

The current list of changes from RC2 stands at:

- Updates to various RELEASE_NOTES files
- Updates to/addition of various README files
- Remove a few redundant or out of date scripts/README files from Java tree
- Update to avoid error in the cpp hello_xml example
- Make the ruby hello example executable
- QPID-2914: python address parser doesn't recognize None
- QPID-2947: update slf4j to allow using the java client package
out-of-the-box
- QPID-2948: Generated API docs have extraneous macro names in method
signatures
- QPID-2950: stop incorrectly logging an expected exception during
DerbyMessageStore closure

Thanks,
Robbie


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project:      http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org

Re: Possible inclusions for RC3? Act now...

[Andrew Stitcher <as...@redhat.com>]

On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 15:19 +0000, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> Gordon applied this change for the 0.6 release:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=904458&view=rev

> Talking of JIRA, what are peoples thoughts on the version numbers
> post-release? Should the 0.7 and 0.8 versions be merged together and
> renamed 0.8 ? I think it might be more understandable for users, as
> 0.7 was never released. Currently there are items in both 0.7 and 0.8
> versions and I would have to give links to both Release Notes outputs
> to get a full picture of whats actually in the 0.8 release.

I think that either:

* We retrospectively merge 0.7 & 0.8 together in Jira
* We make sure that the release notes point to both bugs fixed in 0.7 &
0.8.

Merging the revisions seems to lose some information, but I can't think
why it'd be important information.

It should be said though that with our numbering scheme you;d expect the
vast majority of bugs to be fixed in the preceding devel version,
although they probably should be targeted at a release version if there
is a target.

To have many bugs fixed in a release version would mean that there were
a lot of blocking bugs that delayed the release. The other way you;d get
this situation is if we put out bug fix releases, something we've not
done recently at least.

Andrew



---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project:      http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org

Qpid version numbering (again)

[Andrew Stitcher <as...@redhat.com>]

On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 16:50 +0100, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> ...
> Personally I still think this release should have been Qpid 0.7 and not 
> 0.8, the alternatives to an odd/even numbering were never seriously 
> discussed on the list.

That's because we did discuss it on the list when we made the change
originally and it wasn't so long ago that it makes sense to change again
at this point.

It is true that is wasn't a particularly long discussion, but people had
an opportunity to talk about it then (about 1.5 years ago) and it isn't
broken enough (if it is broken at all) that we want to change it every
year or so.

At this point we have a clear version numbering scheme that allows you
tell at a glance if a version you have is released or development (this
is quite useful for bug reporting). It is a scheme that is used by other
open source projects and so shouldn't be too unexpected for our users
(Gnome uses this scheme for example).

Obviously all this is just my opinion, E&OE, YMMV etc.

Andrew




---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project:      http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org

Re: Possible inclusions for RC3? Act now...

[Emmanuel Bourg <eb...@apache.org>]

Le 16/11/2010 16:19, Robbie Gemmell a écrit :

> Talking of JIRA, what are peoples thoughts on the version numbers
> post-release? Should the 0.7 and 0.8 versions be merged together and
> renamed 0.8 ? I think it might be more understandable for users, as
> 0.7 was never released. Currently there are items in both 0.7 and 0.8
> versions and I would have to give links to both Release Notes outputs
> to get a full picture of whats actually in the 0.8 release.

Merging the two versions in JIRA makes sense (0.7 becomes 0.8).

The release notes will have to explain why the version number jumped 
from 0.6 to 0.8, otherwise people will keep asking what happened to the 
0.7 release.

Personally I still think this release should have been Qpid 0.7 and not 
0.8, the alternatives to an odd/even numbering were never seriously 
discussed on the list.

Emmanuel Bourg

RE: Possible inclusions for RC3? Act now...

[Steve Huston <sh...@riverace.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robbie Gemmell [mailto:robbie.gemmell@gmail.com] 
> ...
>
> Talking of JIRA, what are peoples thoughts on the version 
> numbers post-release? Should the 0.7 and 0.8 versions be 
> merged together and renamed 0.8 ? I think it might be more 
> understandable for users, as 0.7 was never released. 

I think it's a bad idea to merge the versions in JIRA. If someone
reported against 0.7, we know they are working in the dev stream. If
it's reported against 0.8 we can be fairly sure the user pulled a
release kit and is working with that.

> Currently there are items in both 0.7 and 0.8 versions and I 
> would have to give links to both Release Notes outputs to get 
> a full picture of whats actually in the 0.8 release.

Reporting what is fixed for 0.8 (since 0.6) can be a list of all the 0.7
and 0.8 fixes.

-Steve


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project:      http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org

Re: Possible inclusions for RC3? Act now...

[Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>]

Gordon applied this change for the 0.6 release:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=904458&view=rev

At the very least something similar for 0.8 will do. The final
'release notes' can just be a link to the auto-generated JIRA output,
but we should have a few things listed in the release email to call
out any major highlights. I started such a list on the wiki page I
made, https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/qpid/0.8+Release ,
it would be good if everyone would please make suggestions for it.

Talking of JIRA, what are peoples thoughts on the version numbers
post-release? Should the 0.7 and 0.8 versions be merged together and
renamed 0.8 ? I think it might be more understandable for users, as
0.7 was never released. Currently there are items in both 0.7 and 0.8
versions and I would have to give links to both Release Notes outputs
to get a full picture of whats actually in the 0.8 release.

Robbie

On 16 November 2010 13:58, Alan Conway <ac...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 11/15/2010 08:03 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>>
>> So, I have changed my mind about incorporating updates to RC2 to fix the
>> mostly documentation-related issues noted thus far; in the interests of
>> these changes actually getting made sooner rather than later (e.g. let's
>> say
>> the 0.10 RC stages :P), I will produce RC3 later in the week to
>> incorporate
>> such updates if they are made. Quid pro quo people.
>>
>> I include a summary list below of possible changes to the RC's mentioned
>> to
>> date for people familiar with the affected areas to action. I will update
>> the Java client/example readme.
>>
> [snip]
>>
>> There's an out of date RELEASE_NOTES file from the M4 release. Do we
>> overwrite
>> that each time or do we have a better way of getting release notes (e.g.
>> from
>> JIRAs)? It is referred to by README.txt so if we remove it we need to
>> update
>> that.
>
> Are we planning to do release notes for 0.8 release? They could be added to
> this file,  or if we're distributing them some other way we can delete it
> and put an appropriate pointer in the README.
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project:      http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org

Re: Possible inclusions for RC3? Act now...

[Alan Conway <ac...@redhat.com>]

On 11/15/2010 08:03 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> So, I have changed my mind about incorporating updates to RC2 to fix the
> mostly documentation-related issues noted thus far; in the interests of
> these changes actually getting made sooner rather than later (e.g. let's say
> the 0.10 RC stages :P), I will produce RC3 later in the week to incorporate
> such updates if they are made. Quid pro quo people.
>
> I include a summary list below of possible changes to the RC's mentioned to
> date for people familiar with the affected areas to action. I will update
> the Java client/example readme.
>
[snip]
> There's an out of date RELEASE_NOTES file from the M4 release. Do we
> overwrite
> that each time or do we have a better way of getting release notes (e.g.
> from
> JIRAs)? It is referred to by README.txt so if we remove it we need to update
> that.

Are we planning to do release notes for 0.8 release? They could be added to this 
file,  or if we're distributing them some other way we can delete it and put an 
appropriate pointer in the README.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project:      http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org