You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@wicket.apache.org by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> on 2008/03/14 09:04:27 UTC
Planning Wicket Next Generation
All,
With 1.3.2 out the door we should start planning our next release.
We have agreed upon doing milestone releases to give our current users
a quick and easy way to play with the new features, such as generics.
Between those milestones we don't promise API stability, so if
generics don't work or need some tweaking we are free to change that.
But first things first:
1 - wicket 1.4 or 2.0 (for now I'll refer to Wicket Next Generation (WNG)?
2 - are we going to timebox the milestones, or plan on features added?
3 - how many milestones do we plan?
4 - which features go into each milestone?
1: Wicket 1.4 or 2.0?
If I remember correctly we decided on 2.0 with a small margin.
2. Time box or feature box milestones
I think feature box is the way to go.
3: How many milestones?
I suggest 5 milestone releases:
WNG-M1 - WNG-M4 : add new features, fix bugs in previous milestone
WNG-M5 : API freeze, move to release
We should focus on adding 2-3 bigger features per milestone, and
reserve other features for WNG.1
4: Which features in each milestone?
Our planning should be committed to a Wiki document or in JIRA, but
for discussion sake, I'll post the milestone list here:
M1: generics only
M2:
M3:
M4:
M5:
Martijn
--
Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst
Apache Wicket 1.3.1 is released
Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.1
Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation
Posted by Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com>.
>
> 3 - how many milestones do we plan?
> 4 - which features go into each milestone?
>
> 1: Wicket 1.4 or 2.0?
>
> If I remember correctly we decided on 2.0 with a small margin.
1.4 or 2.0 depends on me how fast and and how big change the next release
will bring
Is it just generics and some nice features and not even big api breaks?
Is then 2.0 really already what we want to call it?
I dont know if Matej want to do a refactor of the url encoding and juergen
(or who ever) wants to do an overhaul of the markup parsing?
If that is the case then 2.0 is fine by me. (then the final will also take
longer)
>
>
> 2. Time box or feature box milestones
>
> I think feature box is the way to go.
We can plan some and yes timebox is a bit difficult i think.
I cant promise that i can do stuff at any time and how much time i can spent
on it.
I guess thats the case for the most of us.
I will start with generics as soon as i can, maybe this weekend.
But when are we going to branch? When is head not 1.3.x anymore?
>
>
> 3: How many milestones?
>
> I suggest 5 milestone releases:
> WNG-M1 - WNG-M4 : add new features, fix bugs in previous milestone
> WNG-M5 : API freeze, move to release
> We should focus on adding 2-3 bigger features per milestone, and
> reserve other features for WNG.1
something like that if fine but..
>
>
> 4: Which features in each milestone?
>
> Our planning should be committed to a Wiki document or in JIRA, but
> for discussion sake, I'll post the milestone list here:
>
> M1: generics only
> M2:
> M3:
> M4:
> M5:
I dont know if i can really say that milestone has that feature.
Its really more a thing who as the time for what at what time.
And some features just cost time.
Now i think about it . Maybe a timebox is better lets say every 1.5 month or
2 months
And then decide with all of us what features are really should be in the
final
and then plan 1 milestone ahead. Then maybe the time constain will push us a
bit
(just as when Frank says lets do 1.3.2 this weekend, suddenly loads of bugs
where fixed :) )
But anyway if we do a timebox or just feature planning
Do it 1 milestone ahead. I dont think we can really plan M4 already..
johan
johan
Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation
Posted by Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com>.
are you mad? *VSS!!!*
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 5:33 PM, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> mercurial!
>
> -igor
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 4:39 AM, James Carman
> <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
> > On 3/21/08, Sebastiaan van Erk <se...@sebster.com> wrote:
> > > And other than that, I seriously doubt it's the VCS that's the issue,
> > > but rather it's supporting 3 (or more) different branches, testing
> that
> > > the patches work accross all branches, making different patches for
> > > those that don't etc. With a relatively small team of *volunteers*
> it's
> > > a choice where you spend your resources...
> > >
> > > And I personally think a centralized VCS is much better for projects
> > > with a small core team anyway.
> >
> > There has already been a lengthy discussion about git vs. svn on other
> > lists within the ASF. So, let's try not to have it here, please. You
> > wouldn't believe how much traffic (unless you're on those lists) that
> > generated. I don't think my INBOX can take it again. :)
> >
>
Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
mercurial!
-igor
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 4:39 AM, James Carman
<ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
> On 3/21/08, Sebastiaan van Erk <se...@sebster.com> wrote:
> > And other than that, I seriously doubt it's the VCS that's the issue,
> > but rather it's supporting 3 (or more) different branches, testing that
> > the patches work accross all branches, making different patches for
> > those that don't etc. With a relatively small team of *volunteers* it's
> > a choice where you spend your resources...
> >
> > And I personally think a centralized VCS is much better for projects
> > with a small core team anyway.
>
> There has already been a lengthy discussion about git vs. svn on other
> lists within the ASF. So, let's try not to have it here, please. You
> wouldn't believe how much traffic (unless you're on those lists) that
> generated. I don't think my INBOX can take it again. :)
>
Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
On 3/21/08, Sebastiaan van Erk <se...@sebster.com> wrote:
> And other than that, I seriously doubt it's the VCS that's the issue,
> but rather it's supporting 3 (or more) different branches, testing that
> the patches work accross all branches, making different patches for
> those that don't etc. With a relatively small team of *volunteers* it's
> a choice where you spend your resources...
>
> And I personally think a centralized VCS is much better for projects
> with a small core team anyway.
There has already been a lengthy discussion about git vs. svn on other
lists within the ASF. So, let's try not to have it here, please. You
wouldn't believe how much traffic (unless you're on those lists) that
generated. I don't think my INBOX can take it again. :)
Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation
Posted by Sebastiaan van Erk <se...@sebster.com>.
And other than that, I seriously doubt it's the VCS that's the issue,
but rather it's supporting 3 (or more) different branches, testing that
the patches work accross all branches, making different patches for
those that don't etc. With a relatively small team of *volunteers* it's
a choice where you spend your resources...
And I personally think a centralized VCS is much better for projects
with a small core team anyway.
Regards,
Sebastiaan
Gerolf Seitz wrote:
>> and don't even get me started on the talk you mentioned...
>>
>
> to make this clear:
> the talk is held by Linus Torvalds and most of the time he's bitching about
> how bad CVS is and how stupid the SVN guys are (with SVN devs sitting
> in the audience) for trying to fix something which is inherently broken
> (meaning centralized vcs) and how great he is, because he hacked it
> together in probably only an afternoon (don't remember the exact timespan).
>
> sry, but i just can't stand such attitude, which is why i've never taken a
> closer
> look at git after watching the talk.
>
> Gerolf
>
>
>
>> Gerolf
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 11:33 AM, Antony Stubbs <an...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Switch your vcs to http://git.or.cz/ git (
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XpnKHJAok8 intro ), then merging won't
>>> be a
>>> problem.
>>>
>>> Johan Compagner wrote:
>>>> But doing a 1.4 release so quickly with only generics means for me
>>>> merging of 3 branches.
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://www.nabble.com/Planning-Wicket-Next-Generation-tp16046194p16196479.html
>>> Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>>
>
Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation
Posted by Antony Stubbs <an...@gmail.com>.
Yes it was quite fascinating to watch him talk.... I don't want ti high jack
the thread, but maybe have a look at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dhZ9BXQgc4 this talk about git by one of the
other main dev's , it's much more informative about how git actually works.
don't let linus's talk keep you away from git, that would be a real shame.
and btw git can inter-operate with svn.
I've used it to clone the wicket-contrib-groovy project to
http://github.com/astubbs/wicket-contrib-groovy/tree/wicket1.3Compilecompat
so i can do some work on it. it's pretty neat :)
you're right, it is a bad attitude. But I think he's a got a point about
strong opinions. the world suffers from so much apathy, a strong opinion can
be useful to get actual movement out of people.
___________________________
http://stubbisms.wordpress.com http://stubbisms.wordpress.com
Gerolf Seitz wrote:
>
>>
>> and don't even get me started on the talk you mentioned...
>>
>
> to make this clear:
> the talk is held by Linus Torvalds and most of the time he's bitching
> about
> how bad CVS is and how stupid the SVN guys are (with SVN devs sitting
> in the audience) for trying to fix something which is inherently broken
> (meaning centralized vcs) and how great he is, because he hacked it
> together in probably only an afternoon (don't remember the exact
> timespan).
>
> sry, but i just can't stand such attitude, which is why i've never taken a
> closer
> look at git after watching the talk.
>
> Gerolf
>
>
>
>>
>> Gerolf
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 11:33 AM, Antony Stubbs <an...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Switch your vcs to http://git.or.cz/ git (
>> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XpnKHJAok8 intro ), then merging won't
>> > be a
>> > problem.
>> >
>> > Johan Compagner wrote:
>> > >
>> > > But doing a 1.4 release so quickly with only generics means for me
>> > > merging of 3 branches.
>> >
>> > --
>> > View this message in context:
>> >
>> http://www.nabble.com/Planning-Wicket-Next-Generation-tp16046194p16196479.html
>> > Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Planning-Wicket-Next-Generation-tp16046194p16196735.html
Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation
Posted by Gerolf Seitz <ge...@gmail.com>.
>
> and don't even get me started on the talk you mentioned...
>
to make this clear:
the talk is held by Linus Torvalds and most of the time he's bitching about
how bad CVS is and how stupid the SVN guys are (with SVN devs sitting
in the audience) for trying to fix something which is inherently broken
(meaning centralized vcs) and how great he is, because he hacked it
together in probably only an afternoon (don't remember the exact timespan).
sry, but i just can't stand such attitude, which is why i've never taken a
closer
look at git after watching the talk.
Gerolf
>
> Gerolf
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 11:33 AM, Antony Stubbs <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Switch your vcs to http://git.or.cz/ git (
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XpnKHJAok8 intro ), then merging won't
> > be a
> > problem.
> >
> > Johan Compagner wrote:
> > >
> > > But doing a 1.4 release so quickly with only generics means for me
> > > merging of 3 branches.
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> > http://www.nabble.com/Planning-Wicket-Next-Generation-tp16046194p16196479.html
> > Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >
> >
>
Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation
Posted by Gerolf Seitz <ge...@gmail.com>.
unfortunately that's not possible, since we rely on ASF infrastructure,
which is SVN.
and don't even get me started on the talk you mentioned...
Gerolf
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 11:33 AM, Antony Stubbs <an...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Switch your vcs to http://git.or.cz/ git (
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XpnKHJAok8 intro ), then merging won't be
> a
> problem.
>
> Johan Compagner wrote:
> >
> > But doing a 1.4 release so quickly with only generics means for me
> > merging of 3 branches.
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Planning-Wicket-Next-Generation-tp16046194p16196479.html
> Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation
Posted by Antony Stubbs <an...@gmail.com>.
Switch your vcs to http://git.or.cz/ git (
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XpnKHJAok8 intro ), then merging won't be a
problem.
Johan Compagner wrote:
>
> But doing a 1.4 release so quickly with only generics means for me
> merging of 3 branches.
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Planning-Wicket-Next-Generation-tp16046194p16196479.html
Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation
Posted by Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com>.
I am completely agains a quick 1.4 generics only real release.
We will create a milestone 1 build of 1.4 with generics and maybe some
small other stuff that would normally break 1.3 (i have a 1 or 2 bugs
that do break api when i fix that so dont know if we can do that in
1.3)
But doing a 1.4 release so quickly with only generics means for me
merging of 3 branches. Or can we at the moment we release 1.4
completely drop 1.3? Dont think so. So thats a -100 for me i am not
going to merge over 3 branches. I am all for releases as 1.3 when we
release 1 major version the previous one is quite stable and dead in
maintenance/development.
Johan
On 3/15/08, Jonathan Locke <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> i would prefer a very fast 1.4 release with only generics support while we
> do this planning for a 1.5. since we already did this once, i would imagine
> it could be done again in a month or two with a full release that makes a
> lot of people happy and breaks practically nothing. that would give us
> plenty of time to plan in the meantime.
>
> i have permission here at work to open source some of our mobile components
> and would like to add some base-level support for WML and some
> infrastructure that supports mobile devices in general to the next
> generation (whether it's 1.4 or 1.5). whether this ought to go in core or
> somewhere else is up for debate. it's surely lower priority than some other
> features, but i thought i'd throw it in there.
>
>
> Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> >
> > All,
> >
> > With 1.3.2 out the door we should start planning our next release.
> >
> > We have agreed upon doing milestone releases to give our current users
> > a quick and easy way to play with the new features, such as generics.
> > Between those milestones we don't promise API stability, so if
> > generics don't work or need some tweaking we are free to change that.
> >
> > But first things first:
> > 1 - wicket 1.4 or 2.0 (for now I'll refer to Wicket Next Generation (WNG)?
> > 2 - are we going to timebox the milestones, or plan on features added?
> > 3 - how many milestones do we plan?
> > 4 - which features go into each milestone?
> >
> > 1: Wicket 1.4 or 2.0?
> >
> > If I remember correctly we decided on 2.0 with a small margin.
> >
> > 2. Time box or feature box milestones
> >
> > I think feature box is the way to go.
> >
> > 3: How many milestones?
> >
> > I suggest 5 milestone releases:
> > WNG-M1 - WNG-M4 : add new features, fix bugs in previous milestone
> > WNG-M5 : API freeze, move to release
> > We should focus on adding 2-3 bigger features per milestone, and
> > reserve other features for WNG.1
> >
> > 4: Which features in each milestone?
> >
> > Our planning should be committed to a Wiki document or in JIRA, but
> > for discussion sake, I'll post the milestone list here:
> >
> > M1: generics only
> > M2:
> > M3:
> > M4:
> > M5:
> >
> > Martijn
> >
> > --
> > Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst
> > Apache Wicket 1.3.1 is released
> > Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.1
> >
> >
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Planning-Wicket-Next-Generation-tp16046194p16062416.html
> Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation
Posted by Jonathan Locke <jo...@gmail.com>.
i would prefer a very fast 1.4 release with only generics support while we
do this planning for a 1.5. since we already did this once, i would imagine
it could be done again in a month or two with a full release that makes a
lot of people happy and breaks practically nothing. that would give us
plenty of time to plan in the meantime.
i have permission here at work to open source some of our mobile components
and would like to add some base-level support for WML and some
infrastructure that supports mobile devices in general to the next
generation (whether it's 1.4 or 1.5). whether this ought to go in core or
somewhere else is up for debate. it's surely lower priority than some other
features, but i thought i'd throw it in there.
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
>
> All,
>
> With 1.3.2 out the door we should start planning our next release.
>
> We have agreed upon doing milestone releases to give our current users
> a quick and easy way to play with the new features, such as generics.
> Between those milestones we don't promise API stability, so if
> generics don't work or need some tweaking we are free to change that.
>
> But first things first:
> 1 - wicket 1.4 or 2.0 (for now I'll refer to Wicket Next Generation (WNG)?
> 2 - are we going to timebox the milestones, or plan on features added?
> 3 - how many milestones do we plan?
> 4 - which features go into each milestone?
>
> 1: Wicket 1.4 or 2.0?
>
> If I remember correctly we decided on 2.0 with a small margin.
>
> 2. Time box or feature box milestones
>
> I think feature box is the way to go.
>
> 3: How many milestones?
>
> I suggest 5 milestone releases:
> WNG-M1 - WNG-M4 : add new features, fix bugs in previous milestone
> WNG-M5 : API freeze, move to release
> We should focus on adding 2-3 bigger features per milestone, and
> reserve other features for WNG.1
>
> 4: Which features in each milestone?
>
> Our planning should be committed to a Wiki document or in JIRA, but
> for discussion sake, I'll post the milestone list here:
>
> M1: generics only
> M2:
> M3:
> M4:
> M5:
>
> Martijn
>
> --
> Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst
> Apache Wicket 1.3.1 is released
> Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.1
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Planning-Wicket-Next-Generation-tp16046194p16062416.html
Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation
Posted by Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com>.
I dont think that wil really happen that we will backport changes
that are to big to do in 1.3.x so that we create 1.4 thats 1.3 with
specific changes but still java4.
We will have then 3 branches again the thing we want to avoid.
Johan
On 3/14/08, Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael
<ni...@jayway.dk> wrote:
> Not binding. But still have an oppion:)
>
> Id say go for 2.0 if it includes generics, it'll leave space for
> maintenance releases on the 1.3 branch. And clearly signal that
> something big has happend, namely that you now need to use java 1.5
>
> my thoughts..
>
> regards Nino
>
> Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > With 1.3.2 out the door we should start planning our next release.
> >
> > We have agreed upon doing milestone releases to give our current users
> > a quick and easy way to play with the new features, such as generics.
> > Between those milestones we don't promise API stability, so if
> > generics don't work or need some tweaking we are free to change that.
> >
> > But first things first:
> > 1 - wicket 1.4 or 2.0 (for now I'll refer to Wicket Next Generation (WNG)?
> > 2 - are we going to timebox the milestones, or plan on features added?
> > 3 - how many milestones do we plan?
> > 4 - which features go into each milestone?
> >
> > 1: Wicket 1.4 or 2.0?
> >
> > If I remember correctly we decided on 2.0 with a small margin.
> >
> > 2. Time box or feature box milestones
> >
> > I think feature box is the way to go.
> >
> > 3: How many milestones?
> >
> > I suggest 5 milestone releases:
> > WNG-M1 - WNG-M4 : add new features, fix bugs in previous milestone
> > WNG-M5 : API freeze, move to release
> > We should focus on adding 2-3 bigger features per milestone, and
> > reserve other features for WNG.1
> >
> > 4: Which features in each milestone?
> >
> > Our planning should be committed to a Wiki document or in JIRA, but
> > for discussion sake, I'll post the milestone list here:
> >
> > M1: generics only
> > M2:
> > M3:
> > M4:
> > M5:
> >
> > Martijn
> >
> >
>
> --
> -Wicket for love
>
>
> Nino Martinez Wael
> Java Specialist @ Jayway DK
> http://www.jayway.dk
> +45 2936 7684
>
>
Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
On 3/14/08, Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael
<ni...@jayway.dk> wrote:
> Not binding. But still have an oppion:)
>
> Id say go for 2.0 if it includes generics, it'll leave space for
> maintenance releases on the 1.3 branch. And clearly signal that
> something big has happend, namely that you now need to use java 1.5
+1
Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation
Posted by Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael <ni...@jayway.dk>.
Not binding. But still have an oppion:)
Id say go for 2.0 if it includes generics, it'll leave space for
maintenance releases on the 1.3 branch. And clearly signal that
something big has happend, namely that you now need to use java 1.5
my thoughts..
regards Nino
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> All,
>
> With 1.3.2 out the door we should start planning our next release.
>
> We have agreed upon doing milestone releases to give our current users
> a quick and easy way to play with the new features, such as generics.
> Between those milestones we don't promise API stability, so if
> generics don't work or need some tweaking we are free to change that.
>
> But first things first:
> 1 - wicket 1.4 or 2.0 (for now I'll refer to Wicket Next Generation (WNG)?
> 2 - are we going to timebox the milestones, or plan on features added?
> 3 - how many milestones do we plan?
> 4 - which features go into each milestone?
>
> 1: Wicket 1.4 or 2.0?
>
> If I remember correctly we decided on 2.0 with a small margin.
>
> 2. Time box or feature box milestones
>
> I think feature box is the way to go.
>
> 3: How many milestones?
>
> I suggest 5 milestone releases:
> WNG-M1 - WNG-M4 : add new features, fix bugs in previous milestone
> WNG-M5 : API freeze, move to release
> We should focus on adding 2-3 bigger features per milestone, and
> reserve other features for WNG.1
>
> 4: Which features in each milestone?
>
> Our planning should be committed to a Wiki document or in JIRA, but
> for discussion sake, I'll post the milestone list here:
>
> M1: generics only
> M2:
> M3:
> M4:
> M5:
>
> Martijn
>
>
--
-Wicket for love
Nino Martinez Wael
Java Specialist @ Jayway DK
http://www.jayway.dk
+45 2936 7684
Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation
Posted by Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com>.
Its not that revolutionairy.
For example if 1.4 was just 1.3+generics then if your project like
vocus thats already on 1.5 it would be a drop in replacement. So api
and 'feature' wise not much has happend then, only easy of development
(for most not all are fans ;))
On 3/14/08, Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/14/08, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > is the next release an evolution or revolution? :) i think first we
> > need to make a list of all major things we want to go into it, and
> > then decide.
>
> I think it counts as revolutionary: abandoning Java 1.4 is
> revolutionary I think.
>
> > > 2 - are we going to timebox the milestones, or plan on features added?
> >
> > personally i think we should come up with a list of all the features
> > we want, throw them into a backlog, and timebox it.
>
> See the wishlist: http://cwiki.apache.org/WICKET/wicket-14-wish-list.html
>
> > > 3 - how many milestones do we plan?
> > id like 6. 1-4 dev, 5-6 stabalizaton. we were never able to get away
> > with just one beta release before, most bugs are found after we put
> > out the first beta...so i dont expect a lot of bugs to be found until
> > the last dev milestone goes out.
>
> Fine with me.
>
> > > 4 - which features go into each milestone?
> > what are the features? :)
>
> :D
>
> http://cwiki.apache.org/WICKET/wicket-14-wish-list.html
>
> Martijn
>
> --
> Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst
> Apache Wicket 1.3.1 is released
> Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.1
>
Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation
Posted by Ryan Sonnek <ry...@gmail.com>.
> > On 3/14/08, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > is the next release an evolution or revolution? :) i think first we
> > > need to make a list of all major things we want to go into it, and
> > > then decide.
> >
> > I think it counts as revolutionary: abandoning Java 1.4 is
> > revolutionary I think.
>
> i dont think it is necessarily revolutionary. java 5 itself wasnt
> revolutionary :)
Just my 2 cents, but I agree with Igor and would vote for calling it
Wicket-1.4. Wicket-NG gives me shudders considering how Maven
exploited that tactic when releasing maven2. I'm still a maven fan,
but the whole MNG concept was ridiculous.
Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 8:56 AM, Martijn Dashorst
<ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/14/08, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > is the next release an evolution or revolution? :) i think first we
> > need to make a list of all major things we want to go into it, and
> > then decide.
>
> I think it counts as revolutionary: abandoning Java 1.4 is
> revolutionary I think.
i dont think it is necessarily revolutionary. java 5 itself wasnt
revolutionary :)
> > > 2 - are we going to timebox the milestones, or plan on features added?
> >
> > personally i think we should come up with a list of all the features
> > we want, throw them into a backlog, and timebox it.
>
> See the wishlist: http://cwiki.apache.org/WICKET/wicket-14-wish-list.html
thats just a wishlist. we havent decided if any of those are going to
go in. there are also some things johan keeps in jira that need to be
taken into consideration. and im sure not all of us put everything
that we want to work on in the wishlist either.
-igor
Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
On 3/14/08, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> is the next release an evolution or revolution? :) i think first we
> need to make a list of all major things we want to go into it, and
> then decide.
I think it counts as revolutionary: abandoning Java 1.4 is
revolutionary I think.
> > 2 - are we going to timebox the milestones, or plan on features added?
>
> personally i think we should come up with a list of all the features
> we want, throw them into a backlog, and timebox it.
See the wishlist: http://cwiki.apache.org/WICKET/wicket-14-wish-list.html
> > 3 - how many milestones do we plan?
> id like 6. 1-4 dev, 5-6 stabalizaton. we were never able to get away
> with just one beta release before, most bugs are found after we put
> out the first beta...so i dont expect a lot of bugs to be found until
> the last dev milestone goes out.
Fine with me.
> > 4 - which features go into each milestone?
> what are the features? :)
:D
http://cwiki.apache.org/WICKET/wicket-14-wish-list.html
Martijn
--
Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst
Apache Wicket 1.3.1 is released
Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.1
Re: Planning Wicket Next Generation
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 1:04 AM, Martijn Dashorst
<ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 1 - wicket 1.4 or 2.0 (for now I'll refer to Wicket Next Generation (WNG)?
is the next release an evolution or revolution? :) i think first we
need to make a list of all major things we want to go into it, and
then decide.
> 2 - are we going to timebox the milestones, or plan on features added?
personally i think we should come up with a list of all the features
we want, throw them into a backlog, and timebox it.
> 3 - how many milestones do we plan?
id like 6. 1-4 dev, 5-6 stabalizaton. we were never able to get away
with just one beta release before, most bugs are found after we put
out the first beta...so i dont expect a lot of bugs to be found until
the last dev milestone goes out.
> 4 - which features go into each milestone?
what are the features? :)
-igor