You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@oltu.apache.org by Łukasz Moreń <lu...@gmail.com> on 2011/07/18 11:34:10 UTC
Preparing code for the first release
Hi all,
I think there are some things that need to be improved before the release.
Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is required
for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?.
With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should be
done:
- unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions in
<dependencyManagement> in the main pom
- change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT (used by
the core pom) - is this change safe?
Cheers,
Lukasz Moren
Re: Preparing code for the first release
Posted by Stefan Seelmann <se...@apache.org>.
And here are some general pointers to release policies and howtos.
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases
http://apache.org/dev/#releases
http://apache.org/dev/release-signing.html
Kind Regards,
Stefan
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Łukasz Moreń <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I think there are some things that need to be improved before the release.
> Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is required
> for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?.
> With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should be
> done:
>
> - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions in
> <dependencyManagement> in the main pom
> - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT (used by
> the core pom) - is this change safe?
>
>
> Cheers,
> Lukasz Moren
>
Re: Preparing code for the first release
Posted by Łukasz Moreń <lu...@gmail.com>.
Hi all,
We contacted some open source adviser that hopefully will speed up progress.
Cheers, Lukasz
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Pid <pi...@pidster.com> wrote:
> On 18/07/2011 10:34, Łukasz Moreń wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I think there are some things that need to be improved before the
> release.
> > Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is required
> > for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?.
> > With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should be
> > done:
> >
> > - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions in
> > <dependencyManagement> in the main pom
> > - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT
> (used by
> > the core pom) - is this change safe?
>
> Lukasz, can you update us on where the legal dept is with the code grant?
>
>
> p
>
>
>
> --
>
> [key:62590808]
>
>
Re: Preparing code for the first release
Posted by Pid <pi...@pidster.com>.
On 18/07/2011 10:34, Łukasz Moreń wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I think there are some things that need to be improved before the release.
> Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is required
> for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?.
> With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should be
> done:
>
> - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions in
> <dependencyManagement> in the main pom
> - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT (used by
> the core pom) - is this change safe?
Lukasz, can you update us on where the legal dept is with the code grant?
p
--
[key:62590808]
Re: Preparing code for the first release
Posted by Scott Wilson <sc...@gmail.com>.
On 25 Oct 2011, at 07:53, Tommaso Teofili wrote:
> 2011/10/25 Łukasz Moreń <lu...@gmail.com>
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> We are still waiting for the IP grant from the university, although I am
>> sure it will be sorted out.
>> I know it may be annoying, but we can just keep waiting.
If there is any way I can help, let me know (I had to get the grant from Bolton Uni for Wookie).
>>
>> There is growing interest in Amber development so to not block that, maybe
>> we could:
>>
>> 1. make a new branch from the current trunk (we would have to do that
>> anyway) - stable draft-10 implementation.
>> 2. continue adding new features to the trunk - there is already few patches
>> waiting for commit on jira.
>>
>> Please let me know what do you think?
>>
>
> a big +1 from me !
> Tommaso
+1 !
>
>
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Lukasz Moren
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Pid <pi...@pidster.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 19/07/2011 07:51, Stefan Seelmann wrote:
>>>> It would be nice if we could solve the IP clearance of the Leelo code
>>>> as soon as possible [1]. We need a signed software grant [2] from
>>>> Newcastle University. Then we need to update the license headers in
>>>> all source files according to [3], that means the copyright notice
>>>> should be moved to the NOTICE file.
>>>
>>> Lukasz, Maciej this is in your hands I think. Can you keep us posted?
>>>
>>> I'm happy to do the tidy up & some of the dull stuff thereafter.
>>>
>>>
>>> p
>>>
>>>> Kind Regards,
>>>> Stefan
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/amber-leeloo.html
>>>> [2] http://apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt
>>>> [3] http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Łukasz Moreń <lukasz.moren@gmail.com
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> I think there are some things that need to be improved before the
>>> release.
>>>>> Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is
>>> required
>>>>> for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?.
>>>>> With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should
>> be
>>>>> done:
>>>>>
>>>>> - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions
>> in
>>>>> <dependencyManagement> in the main pom
>>>>> - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT
>>> (used by
>>>>> the core pom) - is this change safe?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Lukasz Moren
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
Re: Preparing code for the first release
Posted by Tommaso Teofili <to...@gmail.com>.
2011/10/25 Łukasz Moreń <lu...@gmail.com>
> Hi all,
>
> We are still waiting for the IP grant from the university, although I am
> sure it will be sorted out.
> I know it may be annoying, but we can just keep waiting.
>
> There is growing interest in Amber development so to not block that, maybe
> we could:
>
> 1. make a new branch from the current trunk (we would have to do that
> anyway) - stable draft-10 implementation.
> 2. continue adding new features to the trunk - there is already few patches
> waiting for commit on jira.
>
> Please let me know what do you think?
>
a big +1 from me !
Tommaso
>
> Cheers,
> Lukasz Moren
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Pid <pi...@pidster.com> wrote:
>
> > On 19/07/2011 07:51, Stefan Seelmann wrote:
> > > It would be nice if we could solve the IP clearance of the Leelo code
> > > as soon as possible [1]. We need a signed software grant [2] from
> > > Newcastle University. Then we need to update the license headers in
> > > all source files according to [3], that means the copyright notice
> > > should be moved to the NOTICE file.
> >
> > Lukasz, Maciej this is in your hands I think. Can you keep us posted?
> >
> > I'm happy to do the tidy up & some of the dull stuff thereafter.
> >
> >
> > p
> >
> > > Kind Regards,
> > > Stefan
> > >
> > > [1] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/amber-leeloo.html
> > > [2] http://apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt
> > > [3] http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Łukasz Moreń <lukasz.moren@gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> > >> Hi all,
> > >>
> > >> I think there are some things that need to be improved before the
> > release.
> > >> Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is
> > required
> > >> for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?.
> > >> With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should
> be
> > >> done:
> > >>
> > >> - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions
> in
> > >> <dependencyManagement> in the main pom
> > >> - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT
> > (used by
> > >> the core pom) - is this change safe?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Cheers,
> > >> Lukasz Moren
> > >>
> >
> >
>
Re: Preparing code for the first release
Posted by Antonio Sanso <as...@adobe.com>.
Hi Lukas
On Oct 26, 2011, at 4:15 AM, Łukasz Moreń wrote:
> Hi,
>
> comments inline:
>
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 1:07 AM, Antonio Sanso <as...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Lukasz,
>>
>> just my 2 cents here.
>>
>> On Oct 25, 2011, at 3:42 AM, Łukasz Moreń wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> We are still waiting for the IP grant from the university, although I am
>>> sure it will be sorted out.
>>> I know it may be annoying, but we can just keep waiting.
>>>
>>> There is growing interest in Amber development so to not block that,
>> maybe
>>> we could:
>>>
>>> 1. make a new branch from the current trunk (we would have to do that
>>> anyway) - stable draft-10 implementation.
>>
>> Wouldn't be enough doing a tag for it (rather than a branch)? I mean do you
>> expect that anybody would use version 10 of oauth2.0?
>> If not, I do not personally see any real benefit from the branch.
>>
>
> We could do tag as well, however IMHO creating branch is not big harm and we
> have opportunity to commit possible bug fixes for draft-10.
> Many big OAuth 2.0 providers, like Facebook or Google, implements this draft
> and probably it will not change quickly,
> so would be good to keep Amber draft-10 implementation reliable.
thanks for clarify. My "concern" was that as you know maintain another branch sometimes means double work in order to keep all the streaming up to date.
But due the circumstances +1 also from me (not binding).
Regards
Antonio
>
>
>>
>>> 2. continue adding new features to the trunk - there is already few
>> patches
>>> waiting for commit on jira.
>>>
>>> Please let me know what do you think?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Lukasz Moren
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Antonio
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Pid <pi...@pidster.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 19/07/2011 07:51, Stefan Seelmann wrote:
>>>>> It would be nice if we could solve the IP clearance of the Leelo code
>>>>> as soon as possible [1]. We need a signed software grant [2] from
>>>>> Newcastle University. Then we need to update the license headers in
>>>>> all source files according to [3], that means the copyright notice
>>>>> should be moved to the NOTICE file.
>>>>
>>>> Lukasz, Maciej this is in your hands I think. Can you keep us posted?
>>>>
>>>> I'm happy to do the tidy up & some of the dull stuff thereafter.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> p
>>>>
>>>>> Kind Regards,
>>>>> Stefan
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/amber-leeloo.html
>>>>> [2] http://apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt
>>>>> [3] http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Łukasz Moreń <lukasz.moren@gmail.com
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think there are some things that need to be improved before the
>>>> release.
>>>>>> Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is
>>>> required
>>>>>> for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?.
>>>>>> With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should
>> be
>>>>>> done:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions
>> in
>>>>>> <dependencyManagement> in the main pom
>>>>>> - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT
>>>> (used by
>>>>>> the core pom) - is this change safe?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Lukasz Moren
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
Re: Preparing code for the first release
Posted by Łukasz Moreń <lu...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
comments inline:
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 1:07 AM, Antonio Sanso <as...@adobe.com> wrote:
> Hi Lukasz,
>
> just my 2 cents here.
>
> On Oct 25, 2011, at 3:42 AM, Łukasz Moreń wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We are still waiting for the IP grant from the university, although I am
> > sure it will be sorted out.
> > I know it may be annoying, but we can just keep waiting.
> >
> > There is growing interest in Amber development so to not block that,
> maybe
> > we could:
> >
> > 1. make a new branch from the current trunk (we would have to do that
> > anyway) - stable draft-10 implementation.
>
> Wouldn't be enough doing a tag for it (rather than a branch)? I mean do you
> expect that anybody would use version 10 of oauth2.0?
> If not, I do not personally see any real benefit from the branch.
>
We could do tag as well, however IMHO creating branch is not big harm and we
have opportunity to commit possible bug fixes for draft-10.
Many big OAuth 2.0 providers, like Facebook or Google, implements this draft
and probably it will not change quickly,
so would be good to keep Amber draft-10 implementation reliable.
>
> > 2. continue adding new features to the trunk - there is already few
> patches
> > waiting for commit on jira.
> >
> > Please let me know what do you think?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Lukasz Moren
>
> Regards
>
> Antonio
>
>
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Pid <pi...@pidster.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 19/07/2011 07:51, Stefan Seelmann wrote:
> >>> It would be nice if we could solve the IP clearance of the Leelo code
> >>> as soon as possible [1]. We need a signed software grant [2] from
> >>> Newcastle University. Then we need to update the license headers in
> >>> all source files according to [3], that means the copyright notice
> >>> should be moved to the NOTICE file.
> >>
> >> Lukasz, Maciej this is in your hands I think. Can you keep us posted?
> >>
> >> I'm happy to do the tidy up & some of the dull stuff thereafter.
> >>
> >>
> >> p
> >>
> >>> Kind Regards,
> >>> Stefan
> >>>
> >>> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/amber-leeloo.html
> >>> [2] http://apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt
> >>> [3] http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Łukasz Moreń <lukasz.moren@gmail.com
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>>> Hi all,
> >>>>
> >>>> I think there are some things that need to be improved before the
> >> release.
> >>>> Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is
> >> required
> >>>> for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?.
> >>>> With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should
> be
> >>>> done:
> >>>>
> >>>> - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions
> in
> >>>> <dependencyManagement> in the main pom
> >>>> - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT
> >> (used by
> >>>> the core pom) - is this change safe?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers,
> >>>> Lukasz Moren
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
>
>
Re: Preparing code for the first release
Posted by Antonio Sanso <as...@adobe.com>.
Hi Lukasz,
just my 2 cents here.
On Oct 25, 2011, at 3:42 AM, Łukasz Moreń wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We are still waiting for the IP grant from the university, although I am
> sure it will be sorted out.
> I know it may be annoying, but we can just keep waiting.
>
> There is growing interest in Amber development so to not block that, maybe
> we could:
>
> 1. make a new branch from the current trunk (we would have to do that
> anyway) - stable draft-10 implementation.
Wouldn't be enough doing a tag for it (rather than a branch)? I mean do you expect that anybody would use version 10 of oauth2.0?
If not, I do not personally see any real benefit from the branch.
> 2. continue adding new features to the trunk - there is already few patches
> waiting for commit on jira.
>
> Please let me know what do you think?
>
> Cheers,
> Lukasz Moren
Regards
Antonio
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Pid <pi...@pidster.com> wrote:
>
>> On 19/07/2011 07:51, Stefan Seelmann wrote:
>>> It would be nice if we could solve the IP clearance of the Leelo code
>>> as soon as possible [1]. We need a signed software grant [2] from
>>> Newcastle University. Then we need to update the license headers in
>>> all source files according to [3], that means the copyright notice
>>> should be moved to the NOTICE file.
>>
>> Lukasz, Maciej this is in your hands I think. Can you keep us posted?
>>
>> I'm happy to do the tidy up & some of the dull stuff thereafter.
>>
>>
>> p
>>
>>> Kind Regards,
>>> Stefan
>>>
>>> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/amber-leeloo.html
>>> [2] http://apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt
>>> [3] http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Łukasz Moreń <lu...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I think there are some things that need to be improved before the
>> release.
>>>> Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is
>> required
>>>> for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?.
>>>> With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should be
>>>> done:
>>>>
>>>> - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions in
>>>> <dependencyManagement> in the main pom
>>>> - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT
>> (used by
>>>> the core pom) - is this change safe?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Lukasz Moren
>>>>
>>
>>
Re: Preparing code for the first release
Posted by Łukasz Moreń <lu...@gmail.com>.
Hi all,
We are still waiting for the IP grant from the university, although I am
sure it will be sorted out.
I know it may be annoying, but we can just keep waiting.
There is growing interest in Amber development so to not block that, maybe
we could:
1. make a new branch from the current trunk (we would have to do that
anyway) - stable draft-10 implementation.
2. continue adding new features to the trunk - there is already few patches
waiting for commit on jira.
Please let me know what do you think?
Cheers,
Lukasz Moren
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Pid <pi...@pidster.com> wrote:
> On 19/07/2011 07:51, Stefan Seelmann wrote:
> > It would be nice if we could solve the IP clearance of the Leelo code
> > as soon as possible [1]. We need a signed software grant [2] from
> > Newcastle University. Then we need to update the license headers in
> > all source files according to [3], that means the copyright notice
> > should be moved to the NOTICE file.
>
> Lukasz, Maciej this is in your hands I think. Can you keep us posted?
>
> I'm happy to do the tidy up & some of the dull stuff thereafter.
>
>
> p
>
> > Kind Regards,
> > Stefan
> >
> > [1] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/amber-leeloo.html
> > [2] http://apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt
> > [3] http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Łukasz Moreń <lu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I think there are some things that need to be improved before the
> release.
> >> Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is
> required
> >> for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?.
> >> With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should be
> >> done:
> >>
> >> - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions in
> >> <dependencyManagement> in the main pom
> >> - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT
> (used by
> >> the core pom) - is this change safe?
> >>
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Lukasz Moren
> >>
>
>
Re: Preparing code for the first release
Posted by Pid <pi...@pidster.com>.
On 19/07/2011 07:51, Stefan Seelmann wrote:
> It would be nice if we could solve the IP clearance of the Leelo code
> as soon as possible [1]. We need a signed software grant [2] from
> Newcastle University. Then we need to update the license headers in
> all source files according to [3], that means the copyright notice
> should be moved to the NOTICE file.
Lukasz, Maciej this is in your hands I think. Can you keep us posted?
I'm happy to do the tidy up & some of the dull stuff thereafter.
p
> Kind Regards,
> Stefan
>
> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/amber-leeloo.html
> [2] http://apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt
> [3] http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Łukasz Moreń <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I think there are some things that need to be improved before the release.
>> Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is required
>> for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?.
>> With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should be
>> done:
>>
>> - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions in
>> <dependencyManagement> in the main pom
>> - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT (used by
>> the core pom) - is this change safe?
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Lukasz Moren
>>
Re: Preparing code for the first release
Posted by Stefan Seelmann <se...@apache.org>.
It would be nice if we could solve the IP clearance of the Leelo code
as soon as possible [1]. We need a signed software grant [2] from
Newcastle University. Then we need to update the license headers in
all source files according to [3], that means the copyright notice
should be moved to the NOTICE file.
Kind Regards,
Stefan
[1] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/amber-leeloo.html
[2] http://apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt
[3] http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Łukasz Moreń <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I think there are some things that need to be improved before the release.
> Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is required
> for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?.
> With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should be
> done:
>
> - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions in
> <dependencyManagement> in the main pom
> - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT (used by
> the core pom) - is this change safe?
>
>
> Cheers,
> Lukasz Moren
>
Re: Preparing code for the first release
Posted by Pid <pi...@pidster.com>.
On 18/07/2011 16:48, Raymond Feng wrote:
> It's project by project. The only requirement is to have -incubating as part of the version.
>
> In Amber case, if we reserve version 1.0 to match the final oAuth 2.0 spec, we can start with 0.x-incubating, even 0.5-incubating.
That's a sensible suggestion.
p
> We should try to use maven release plugin to handle the maven release.
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
> ________________________________________________________________
> Raymond Feng
> rfeng@apache.org
> Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
> Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
> Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
> ________________________________________________________________
>
> On Jul 18, 2011, at 6:15 AM, Pid wrote:
>
>> On 18/07/2011 12:13, Łukasz Moreń wrote:
>>> Yes, a 1.0 release.
>>
>> I think we should aim lower & start with a 0.1.
>>
>> This will give us the chance to work towards a declaration that an
>> eventual 1.0 is stable and bug-free. We need to be public and get user
>> feedback to achieve that IMHO.
>>
>> I think most incubator projects start with a 0.1 but that's probably
>> convention.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>>
>> p
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Pid <pi...@pidster.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 18/07/2011 11:52, Maciej Machulak wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 18 July 2011 10:34, Łukasz Moreń <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think there are some things that need to be improved before the
>>>> release.
>>>>>> Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is
>>>> required
>>>>>> for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, this would be great. We'll then use the feedback and improve
>>>>> what's necessary.
>>>>>
>>>>>> With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should be
>>>>>> done:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions in
>>>>>> <dependencyManagement> in the main pom
>>>>>
>>>>> Fully agree.
>>>>>
>>>>>> - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT
>>>> (used by
>>>>>> the core pom) - is this change safe?
>>>>>
>>>>> Ah, yes. This should be probably changed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway, lets look for some feedback and then we'll make the changes.
>>>>> It'll be great if somebody more experienced could help with the Apache
>>>>> process (ip, voting, etc.).
>>>>
>>>> Do you mean that we'd be preparing a 1.0 release? Or are you referring
>>>> to something else?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> p
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Lukasz Moren
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Maciej
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Preparing code for the first release
Posted by Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com>.
It's project by project. The only requirement is to have -incubating as part of the version.
In Amber case, if we reserve version 1.0 to match the final oAuth 2.0 spec, we can start with 0.x-incubating, even 0.5-incubating.
We should try to use maven release plugin to handle the maven release.
Thanks,
Raymond
________________________________________________________________
Raymond Feng
rfeng@apache.org
Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book: www.tuscanyinaction.com
Personal Web Site: www.enjoyjava.com
________________________________________________________________
On Jul 18, 2011, at 6:15 AM, Pid wrote:
> On 18/07/2011 12:13, Łukasz Moreń wrote:
>> Yes, a 1.0 release.
>
> I think we should aim lower & start with a 0.1.
>
> This will give us the chance to work towards a declaration that an
> eventual 1.0 is stable and bug-free. We need to be public and get user
> feedback to achieve that IMHO.
>
> I think most incubator projects start with a 0.1 but that's probably
> convention.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> p
>
>
>
>> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Pid <pi...@pidster.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 18/07/2011 11:52, Maciej Machulak wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> On 18 July 2011 10:34, Łukasz Moreń <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> I think there are some things that need to be improved before the
>>> release.
>>>>> Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is
>>> required
>>>>> for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, this would be great. We'll then use the feedback and improve
>>>> what's necessary.
>>>>
>>>>> With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should be
>>>>> done:
>>>>>
>>>>> - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions in
>>>>> <dependencyManagement> in the main pom
>>>>
>>>> Fully agree.
>>>>
>>>>> - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT
>>> (used by
>>>>> the core pom) - is this change safe?
>>>>
>>>> Ah, yes. This should be probably changed.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, lets look for some feedback and then we'll make the changes.
>>>> It'll be great if somebody more experienced could help with the Apache
>>>> process (ip, voting, etc.).
>>>
>>> Do you mean that we'd be preparing a 1.0 release? Or are you referring
>>> to something else?
>>>
>>>
>>> p
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Lukasz Moren
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Maciej
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
Re: Preparing code for the first release
Posted by Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>.
I think some incubators project added "incubating" to the release version.
So Amber first release could be "0.1-incubating".
- Henry
2011/7/18 Pid <pi...@pidster.com>:
> On 18/07/2011 12:13, Łukasz Moreń wrote:
>> Yes, a 1.0 release.
>
> I think we should aim lower & start with a 0.1.
>
> This will give us the chance to work towards a declaration that an
> eventual 1.0 is stable and bug-free. We need to be public and get user
> feedback to achieve that IMHO.
>
> I think most incubator projects start with a 0.1 but that's probably
> convention.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> p
>
>
>
>> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Pid <pi...@pidster.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 18/07/2011 11:52, Maciej Machulak wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> On 18 July 2011 10:34, Łukasz Moreń <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> I think there are some things that need to be improved before the
>>> release.
>>>>> Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is
>>> required
>>>>> for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, this would be great. We'll then use the feedback and improve
>>>> what's necessary.
>>>>
>>>>> With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should be
>>>>> done:
>>>>>
>>>>> - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions in
>>>>> <dependencyManagement> in the main pom
>>>>
>>>> Fully agree.
>>>>
>>>>> - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT
>>> (used by
>>>>> the core pom) - is this change safe?
>>>>
>>>> Ah, yes. This should be probably changed.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, lets look for some feedback and then we'll make the changes.
>>>> It'll be great if somebody more experienced could help with the Apache
>>>> process (ip, voting, etc.).
>>>
>>> Do you mean that we'd be preparing a 1.0 release? Or are you referring
>>> to something else?
>>>
>>>
>>> p
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Lukasz Moren
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Maciej
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
Re: Preparing code for the first release
Posted by Pid <pi...@pidster.com>.
On 18/07/2011 12:13, Łukasz Moreń wrote:
> Yes, a 1.0 release.
I think we should aim lower & start with a 0.1.
This will give us the chance to work towards a declaration that an
eventual 1.0 is stable and bug-free. We need to be public and get user
feedback to achieve that IMHO.
I think most incubator projects start with a 0.1 but that's probably
convention.
Thoughts?
p
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Pid <pi...@pidster.com> wrote:
>
>> On 18/07/2011 11:52, Maciej Machulak wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> On 18 July 2011 10:34, Łukasz Moreń <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I think there are some things that need to be improved before the
>> release.
>>>> Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is
>> required
>>>> for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?.
>>>
>>> Yes, this would be great. We'll then use the feedback and improve
>>> what's necessary.
>>>
>>>> With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should be
>>>> done:
>>>>
>>>> - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions in
>>>> <dependencyManagement> in the main pom
>>>
>>> Fully agree.
>>>
>>>> - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT
>> (used by
>>>> the core pom) - is this change safe?
>>>
>>> Ah, yes. This should be probably changed.
>>>
>>> Anyway, lets look for some feedback and then we'll make the changes.
>>> It'll be great if somebody more experienced could help with the Apache
>>> process (ip, voting, etc.).
>>
>> Do you mean that we'd be preparing a 1.0 release? Or are you referring
>> to something else?
>>
>>
>> p
>>
>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Lukasz Moren
>>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Maciej
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: Preparing code for the first release
Posted by Łukasz Moreń <lu...@gmail.com>.
Yes, a 1.0 release.
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Pid <pi...@pidster.com> wrote:
> On 18/07/2011 11:52, Maciej Machulak wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > On 18 July 2011 10:34, Łukasz Moreń <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I think there are some things that need to be improved before the
> release.
> >> Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is
> required
> >> for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?.
> >
> > Yes, this would be great. We'll then use the feedback and improve
> > what's necessary.
> >
> >> With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should be
> >> done:
> >>
> >> - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions in
> >> <dependencyManagement> in the main pom
> >
> > Fully agree.
> >
> >> - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT
> (used by
> >> the core pom) - is this change safe?
> >
> > Ah, yes. This should be probably changed.
> >
> > Anyway, lets look for some feedback and then we'll make the changes.
> > It'll be great if somebody more experienced could help with the Apache
> > process (ip, voting, etc.).
>
> Do you mean that we'd be preparing a 1.0 release? Or are you referring
> to something else?
>
>
> p
>
>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Lukasz Moren
> >>
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Maciej
> >
>
>
>
Re: Preparing code for the first release
Posted by Pid <pi...@pidster.com>.
On 18/07/2011 11:52, Maciej Machulak wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On 18 July 2011 10:34, Łukasz Moreń <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I think there are some things that need to be improved before the release.
>> Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is required
>> for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?.
>
> Yes, this would be great. We'll then use the feedback and improve
> what's necessary.
>
>> With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should be
>> done:
>>
>> - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions in
>> <dependencyManagement> in the main pom
>
> Fully agree.
>
>> - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT (used by
>> the core pom) - is this change safe?
>
> Ah, yes. This should be probably changed.
>
> Anyway, lets look for some feedback and then we'll make the changes.
> It'll be great if somebody more experienced could help with the Apache
> process (ip, voting, etc.).
Do you mean that we'd be preparing a 1.0 release? Or are you referring
to something else?
p
>> Cheers,
>> Lukasz Moren
>>
>
> Cheers,
> Maciej
>
Re: Preparing code for the first release
Posted by Maciej Machulak <ma...@gmail.com>.
Hi all,
On 18 July 2011 10:34, Łukasz Moreń <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I think there are some things that need to be improved before the release.
> Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is required
> for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?.
Yes, this would be great. We'll then use the feedback and improve
what's necessary.
> With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should be
> done:
>
> - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions in
> <dependencyManagement> in the main pom
Fully agree.
> - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT (used by
> the core pom) - is this change safe?
Ah, yes. This should be probably changed.
Anyway, lets look for some feedback and then we'll make the changes.
It'll be great if somebody more experienced could help with the Apache
process (ip, voting, etc.).
>
> Cheers,
> Lukasz Moren
>
Cheers,
Maciej
--
Maciej Machulak
email: maciej.machulak@gmail.com
tel: +48 602 45 31 44
tel: +44 7999 606 767