You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@roller.apache.org by David M Johnson <Da...@Sun.COM> on 2006/05/01 17:43:45 UTC
Scrapping 2.2 -- was Re: VOTE: Release Roller 2.2-incubating
Cliff Schmidt, our legal affairs guy, is insisting that we add Apache
copyright headers to all files in the Roller 2.2 release before we
can make the release. That's fine, but 2.2 is old news now and I'd
like to move forward.
So... since some of us have already put the Roller 2.3 code base
through testing and into production, I would like to focus instead on
getting a Roller 2.3 release out the door with full Apache copyright,
licensing and packaging compliance.
Here's what I'd like to do in the Roller trunk:
1 - Add copyright headers to all files
2 - Implement Proposal_RemoveUnshippables (http://tinyurl.com/rl8qo)
3 - Refactor for org.apache.roller packaging
4 - Put together a Roller 2.3 release candidate (with all 2.2 and 2.3
features)
I'd like to get this over as quickly as possible (i.e. today/
tomorrow) so we can proceed with Roller 3.0 developments like better
URLs and the front-page improvements. And BTW, Anil has already
started #1 and I've already implemented much of #2.
Does anybody object to my moving ahead with this work in the trunk?
I'd welcome comments, critiques and suggestions about any part of the
plan.
- Dave
On Apr 30, 2006, at 8:22 PM, Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> On 4/30/06, David Crossley <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Craig McClanahan wrote:
>> > David M Johnson <Da...@sun.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >OK, so Cliff says we need to have copyright notices on all files
>> > >before we can release 2.2 and that we should make the release on
>> > >Apache infrastructure this time.
>> > >
>> > >He also mentioned that somebody has a script that will
>> automatically
>> > >apply said copyright notice to all source files. Anybody know
>> where
>> > >this script can be found?
>> >
>> > There are a variety of relicensing scripts in various languages,
>> in the
>> > "relicense" subdirectory of the "committers" SVN module. You
>> should have
>> > access to that by checking out [1].
>> >
>> > - Dave
>> >
>> > Craig
>> >
>> > [1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/committers
>>
>> I have some local modifications to the Perl version
>> of that tool, but i am waiting to hear the outcome of
>> last week's board meeting before committing the changes.
>
> I explained the issues to the board last week and told them that we
> now have a header approved by our lawyers -- just waiting on one last
> piece of feedback before sending out the proposed text and process to
> the legal-discuss list. I told the board I'd have the official
> resolution ready for them to vote on at the May 17th meeting.
>
> Cliff
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
Re: Scrapping 2.2 -- was Re: VOTE: Release Roller 2.2-incubating
Posted by Jeff Blattman <Je...@Sun.COM>.
dave,
can we get the atom admin stuff into 2.3? we'd need to get the AAPP
patch 4.3 committed, get the docs committed, and move the stuff out of
sandbox.
?
thanks.
David M Johnson wrote:
>
> Cliff Schmidt, our legal affairs guy, is insisting that we add Apache
> copyright headers to all files in the Roller 2.2 release before we can
> make the release. That's fine, but 2.2 is old news now and I'd like to
> move forward.
>
> So... since some of us have already put the Roller 2.3 code base
> through testing and into production, I would like to focus instead on
> getting a Roller 2.3 release out the door with full Apache copyright,
> licensing and packaging compliance.
>
> Here's what I'd like to do in the Roller trunk:
> 1 - Add copyright headers to all files
> 2 - Implement Proposal_RemoveUnshippables (http://tinyurl.com/rl8qo)
> 3 - Refactor for org.apache.roller packaging
> 4 - Put together a Roller 2.3 release candidate (with all 2.2 and 2.3
> features)
>
> I'd like to get this over as quickly as possible (i.e. today/tomorrow)
> so we can proceed with Roller 3.0 developments like better URLs and
> the front-page improvements. And BTW, Anil has already started #1 and
> I've already implemented much of #2.
>
> Does anybody object to my moving ahead with this work in the trunk?
> I'd welcome comments, critiques and suggestions about any part of the
> plan.
>
> - Dave
>
>
>
>
> On Apr 30, 2006, at 8:22 PM, Cliff Schmidt wrote:
>> On 4/30/06, David Crossley <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Craig McClanahan wrote:
>>> > David M Johnson <Da...@sun.com> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > >OK, so Cliff says we need to have copyright notices on all files
>>> > >before we can release 2.2 and that we should make the release on
>>> > >Apache infrastructure this time.
>>> > >
>>> > >He also mentioned that somebody has a script that will automatically
>>> > >apply said copyright notice to all source files. Anybody know where
>>> > >this script can be found?
>>> >
>>> > There are a variety of relicensing scripts in various languages,
>>> in the
>>> > "relicense" subdirectory of the "committers" SVN module. You
>>> should have
>>> > access to that by checking out [1].
>>> >
>>> > - Dave
>>> >
>>> > Craig
>>> >
>>> > [1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/committers
>>>
>>> I have some local modifications to the Perl version
>>> of that tool, but i am waiting to hear the outcome of
>>> last week's board meeting before committing the changes.
>>
>> I explained the issues to the board last week and told them that we
>> now have a header approved by our lawyers -- just waiting on one last
>> piece of feedback before sending out the proposed text and process to
>> the legal-discuss list. I told the board I'd have the official
>> resolution ready for them to vote on at the May 17th meeting.
>>
>> Cliff
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>
Re: Scrapping 2.2 -- was Re: VOTE: Release Roller 2.2-incubating
Posted by Dave Lindsey <ve...@gmail.com>.
I deployed 2.2 also. An upgrade script would be helpful.
>
>
Re: Scrapping 2.2 -- was Re: VOTE: Release Roller 2.2-incubating
Posted by Dave Johnson <da...@rollerweblogger.org>.
On May 13, 2006, at 3:33 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> Noticed that there isn't one of these currently in 2.3. Maybe because
> there's no db difference between 2.2 and 2.3?
We added a new 'summary' field to the weblogentry table in 2.3. I
added a couple of comments to the 2.1-to-2.3 script to indicate the
2.2 vs. 2.3 fields.
- Dave
Re: Scrapping 2.2 -- was Re: VOTE: Release Roller 2.2-incubating
Posted by Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>.
Noticed that there isn't one of these currently in 2.3. Maybe because
there's no db difference between 2.2 and 2.3?
Hen
On 5/2/06, Matt Raible <mr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm not too happy about 2.2 being scrapped - mostly because I deployed
> it to my site. However, I will be happy as long as there's a
> 2.2-to-2.3 upgrade script.
>
> Matt
Re: Scrapping 2.2 -- was Re: VOTE: Release Roller 2.2-incubating
Posted by Matt Raible <mr...@gmail.com>.
I'm not too happy about 2.2 being scrapped - mostly because I deployed
it to my site. However, I will be happy as long as there's a
2.2-to-2.3 upgrade script.
Matt
On 5/2/06, Anil Gangolli <an...@busybuddha.org> wrote:
>
> +1 on scrapping the 2.2 release. It's too far behind the trunk to warrant
> bringing it up to these release requirements.
>
> +1 also on the other proposals of Dave's.
>
> Bring on the 2.3 RCs. Hopefully, I'll have time to test an installation
> this time.
>
> --a.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David M Johnson" <Da...@Sun.COM>
> To: <ro...@incubator.apache.org>
> Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 4:21 PM
> Subject: Re: Scrapping 2.2 -- was Re: VOTE: Release Roller 2.2-incubating
>
>
> >
> > FYI: I'm mostly done with this work now. I've committed my changes to the
> > trunk.
> >
> >
> > On May 1, 2006, at 11:43 AM, David M Johnson wrote:
> >> Cliff Schmidt, our legal affairs guy, is insisting that we add Apache
> >> copyright headers to all files in the Roller 2.2 release before we can
> >> make the release. That's fine, but 2.2 is old news now and I'd like to
> >> move forward.
> >>
> >> So... since some of us have already put the Roller 2.3 code base through
> >> testing and into production, I would like to focus instead on getting a
> >> Roller 2.3 release out the door with full Apache copyright, licensing
> >> and packaging compliance.
> >>
> >> Here's what I'd like to do in the Roller trunk:
> >> 1 - Add copyright headers to all files
> >
> > Done
> >
> >> 2 - Implement Proposal_RemoveUnshippables (http://tinyurl.com/rl8qo)
> >
> > Ant target done, install guide done.
> >
> >> 3 - Refactor for org.apache.roller packaging
> >
> > Done
> >
> >> 4 - Put together a Roller 2.3 release candidate (with all 2.2 and 2.3
> >> features)
> >
> > Almost ready for an RC
> >
> > - Dave
> >
>
>
Re: Scrapping 2.2 -- was Re: VOTE: Release Roller 2.2-incubating
Posted by Anil Gangolli <an...@busybuddha.org>.
+1 on scrapping the 2.2 release. It's too far behind the trunk to warrant
bringing it up to these release requirements.
+1 also on the other proposals of Dave's.
Bring on the 2.3 RCs. Hopefully, I'll have time to test an installation
this time.
--a.
----- Original Message -----
From: "David M Johnson" <Da...@Sun.COM>
To: <ro...@incubator.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 4:21 PM
Subject: Re: Scrapping 2.2 -- was Re: VOTE: Release Roller 2.2-incubating
>
> FYI: I'm mostly done with this work now. I've committed my changes to the
> trunk.
>
>
> On May 1, 2006, at 11:43 AM, David M Johnson wrote:
>> Cliff Schmidt, our legal affairs guy, is insisting that we add Apache
>> copyright headers to all files in the Roller 2.2 release before we can
>> make the release. That's fine, but 2.2 is old news now and I'd like to
>> move forward.
>>
>> So... since some of us have already put the Roller 2.3 code base through
>> testing and into production, I would like to focus instead on getting a
>> Roller 2.3 release out the door with full Apache copyright, licensing
>> and packaging compliance.
>>
>> Here's what I'd like to do in the Roller trunk:
>> 1 - Add copyright headers to all files
>
> Done
>
>> 2 - Implement Proposal_RemoveUnshippables (http://tinyurl.com/rl8qo)
>
> Ant target done, install guide done.
>
>> 3 - Refactor for org.apache.roller packaging
>
> Done
>
>> 4 - Put together a Roller 2.3 release candidate (with all 2.2 and 2.3
>> features)
>
> Almost ready for an RC
>
> - Dave
>
Re: Scrapping 2.2 -- was Re: VOTE: Release Roller 2.2-incubating
Posted by David M Johnson <Da...@Sun.COM>.
FYI: I'm mostly done with this work now. I've committed my changes to
the trunk.
On May 1, 2006, at 11:43 AM, David M Johnson wrote:
> Cliff Schmidt, our legal affairs guy, is insisting that we add
> Apache copyright headers to all files in the Roller 2.2 release
> before we can make the release. That's fine, but 2.2 is old news
> now and I'd like to move forward.
>
> So... since some of us have already put the Roller 2.3 code base
> through testing and into production, I would like to focus instead
> on getting a Roller 2.3 release out the door with full Apache
> copyright, licensing and packaging compliance.
>
> Here's what I'd like to do in the Roller trunk:
> 1 - Add copyright headers to all files
Done
> 2 - Implement Proposal_RemoveUnshippables (http://tinyurl.com/rl8qo)
Ant target done, install guide done.
> 3 - Refactor for org.apache.roller packaging
Done
> 4 - Put together a Roller 2.3 release candidate (with all 2.2 and
> 2.3 features)
Almost ready for an RC
- Dave
Re: Scrapping 2.2 -- was Re: VOTE: Release Roller 2.2-incubating
Posted by Allen Gilliland <al...@sun.com>.
David M Johnson wrote:
>
> On May 1, 2006, at 12:17 PM, Allen Gilliland wrote:
>> Bleh. I am still very weary of the whole "download these dependencies
>> on your own" situation. Especially if we can't even keep the proper
>> version in the repository to develop against and just not ship it in
>> the release. People are going to start doing the wrong thing, like
>> getting the wrong Hibernate version maybe?
>
> We can keep Hibernate in the repo and develop against it, but we just
> can't ship it.
ahhh, that is a huge relief. i thought the proposal was suggesting that
we would have to do the same thing for development, which would have
made things even worse.
>
>
>> I am fine with all the other stuff (#1, #3, #4), but #3 still has me
>> worried. I don't see the benefit in replacing Hibernate long term
>> with something else just because of an opensource licensing issue and
>> I hate to think about putting up with this external downloads thing
>> forever. Maybe I am just a bitter ball though?
>
> #2 has me worried as well. The Apache LGPL policy is not user-friendly
> at all, but it should not impact our work as developers -- remove
> unshippables is just a release engineering and installation thing.
got it, that is at least more manageable.
maybe what we can do is to actually package the external dependencies
ourselves and serve them up from either java.net or just
rollerweblogger.org. that way it's not as complicated as telling the
user to "go get Hibernate x.x.x, and javamail x.x.x, and ..." and
instead we would just give them a simple bundle which they would unzip
in the same location as the release file they got from Apache and they
would be all set.
not full proof, but it's at least better than asking users to get the
dependencies themselves.
>
> And by the way, there's nothing stopping other projects and companies
> from shipping Roller "distributions" that include everything you need to
> run Roller. For example, my Blogapps project ships a Roller distribution
> called the "Blogapps Server" that includes Roller, JSPWiki, Tomcat and
> HSQLDB.
true.
-- Allen
>
> - Dave
>
Re: Scrapping 2.2 -- was Re: VOTE: Release Roller 2.2-incubating
Posted by David M Johnson <Da...@Sun.COM>.
On May 1, 2006, at 12:17 PM, Allen Gilliland wrote:
> Bleh. I am still very weary of the whole "download these
> dependencies on your own" situation. Especially if we can't even
> keep the proper version in the repository to develop against and
> just not ship it in the release. People are going to start doing
> the wrong thing, like getting the wrong Hibernate version maybe?
We can keep Hibernate in the repo and develop against it, but we just
can't ship it.
> I am fine with all the other stuff (#1, #3, #4), but #3 still has
> me worried. I don't see the benefit in replacing Hibernate long
> term with something else just because of an opensource licensing
> issue and I hate to think about putting up with this external
> downloads thing forever. Maybe I am just a bitter ball though?
#2 has me worried as well. The Apache LGPL policy is not user-
friendly at all, but it should not impact our work as developers --
remove unshippables is just a release engineering and installation
thing.
And by the way, there's nothing stopping other projects and companies
from shipping Roller "distributions" that include everything you need
to run Roller. For example, my Blogapps project ships a Roller
distribution called the "Blogapps Server" that includes Roller,
JSPWiki, Tomcat and HSQLDB.
- Dave
Re: Scrapping 2.2 -- was Re: VOTE: Release Roller 2.2-incubating
Posted by Allen Gilliland <al...@sun.com>.
Bleh. I am still very weary of the whole "download these dependencies
on your own" situation. Especially if we can't even keep the proper
version in the repository to develop against and just not ship it in the
release. People are going to start doing the wrong thing, like getting
the wrong Hibernate version maybe?
I am fine with all the other stuff (#1, #3, #4), but #3 still has me
worried. I don't see the benefit in replacing Hibernate long term with
something else just because of an opensource licensing issue and I hate
to think about putting up with this external downloads thing forever.
Maybe I am just a bitter ball though?
-- Allen
David M Johnson wrote:
>
> Cliff Schmidt, our legal affairs guy, is insisting that we add Apache
> copyright headers to all files in the Roller 2.2 release before we can
> make the release. That's fine, but 2.2 is old news now and I'd like to
> move forward.
>
> So... since some of us have already put the Roller 2.3 code base through
> testing and into production, I would like to focus instead on getting a
> Roller 2.3 release out the door with full Apache copyright, licensing
> and packaging compliance.
>
> Here's what I'd like to do in the Roller trunk:
> 1 - Add copyright headers to all files
> 2 - Implement Proposal_RemoveUnshippables (http://tinyurl.com/rl8qo)
> 3 - Refactor for org.apache.roller packaging
> 4 - Put together a Roller 2.3 release candidate (with all 2.2 and 2.3
> features)
>
> I'd like to get this over as quickly as possible (i.e. today/tomorrow)
> so we can proceed with Roller 3.0 developments like better URLs and the
> front-page improvements. And BTW, Anil has already started #1 and I've
> already implemented much of #2.
>
> Does anybody object to my moving ahead with this work in the trunk? I'd
> welcome comments, critiques and suggestions about any part of the plan.
>
> - Dave
>
>
>
>
> On Apr 30, 2006, at 8:22 PM, Cliff Schmidt wrote:
>> On 4/30/06, David Crossley <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Craig McClanahan wrote:
>>> > David M Johnson <Da...@sun.com> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > >OK, so Cliff says we need to have copyright notices on all files
>>> > >before we can release 2.2 and that we should make the release on
>>> > >Apache infrastructure this time.
>>> > >
>>> > >He also mentioned that somebody has a script that will automatically
>>> > >apply said copyright notice to all source files. Anybody know where
>>> > >this script can be found?
>>> >
>>> > There are a variety of relicensing scripts in various languages, in
>>> the
>>> > "relicense" subdirectory of the "committers" SVN module. You
>>> should have
>>> > access to that by checking out [1].
>>> >
>>> > - Dave
>>> >
>>> > Craig
>>> >
>>> > [1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/committers
>>>
>>> I have some local modifications to the Perl version
>>> of that tool, but i am waiting to hear the outcome of
>>> last week's board meeting before committing the changes.
>>
>> I explained the issues to the board last week and told them that we
>> now have a header approved by our lawyers -- just waiting on one last
>> piece of feedback before sending out the proposed text and process to
>> the legal-discuss list. I told the board I'd have the official
>> resolution ready for them to vote on at the May 17th meeting.
>>
>> Cliff
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>