You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to bluesky-dev@incubator.apache.org by Samuel Kevin <lo...@gmail.com> on 2009/08/18 07:46:40 UTC
what we are doing and proposed next step
Hi, All:
After we solve the problem of FFmpeg, i guess our next goal is to make
the first release. I've read through the whole page of guidlines of Release-
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html. Wow, it's quite
large and to some extent, for me, ambiguous. The following is my
understanding to Release.
Release involves two things most. First is the code. We should guarantee
both quality and the legitimacy under ASL. Personally, i suggest that we
should focus on clarifying the legitimacy of the source code. Some codes
,with free license , the initial developers used in our project are mixed
with the code they wrote. So we had to isolate the free licensed code and
clarify the license. For the sake of convinience, the initial developers put
some libs, whose licenses conflict with ASL, in the source code. Of course,
we should also clear them out.
Second is the documentation. I checked the example the guideline shows-
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/ and i found that we only miss the API
document. I suppose we could use doxygen to help us complete the API. I
don't think comments our code follow the rules of doxygen, so i recommend
that we could mend that when clarifying the legitimacy of the source code.
Guys, here's my thought about next step.
1:Clarify the legitimacy of the source code, meanwhile label the comment
which apt to generate API document by doxygen;
2: use doxygen to create API documents;
3: finish the relevant work a Release needs and make the first Release;
guys, what do you think about that ? Any suggestion?
regards,
Kevin
--
Bowen Ma a.k.a Samuel Kevin @ Bluesky Dev Team XJTU
Shaanxi Province Key Lab. of Satellite and Terrestrial Network Tech
http://incubator.apache.org/bluesky/
Re: what we are doing and proposed next step
Posted by Samuel Kevin <lo...@gmail.com>.
hi, Bernd:
i know that the first Release is a mid-term goal. Actually we are
aready developing the future version of RealClass. A prototype of P2P
version has been completed and tested under windows . And we are also
working on a web-based RealClass system. the current structure of RealClass
is C/S and seems like out of date. So i think that we just need to make the
first release with a stable C/S structured RealClass, then next version
would be p2p and the next web-based,…………。 i do hope that our system could
revolving with the development of new tech.
regards,
Kevin
2009/8/18 Bernd Fondermann <be...@googlemail.com>
> Doing a release is a good goal.
> However, before looking deeper into the exact requirements for doing a
> release, I'd like to see developers in action on the mailing list and
> working on the code in svn as an open source project. I'm seeing none
> of that currently. All this work would be directed towards a release,
> but actually doing the release for me is more of a mid-term goal.
>
> On a more general note - and I'm sorry to say that - I see the Bluesky
> project on the edge of failure.
> There are not enough active mentors on the project and no open
> development is taking place.
>
> Bernd
>
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 09:46, Samuel Kevin<lo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi, All:
> > After we solve the problem of FFmpeg, i guess our next goal is to make
> > the first release. I've read through the whole page of guidlines of
> Release-
> > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html. Wow, it's
> quite
> > large and to some extent, for me, ambiguous. The following is my
> > understanding to Release.
> >
> > Release involves two things most. First is the code. We should
> guarantee
> > both quality and the legitimacy under ASL. Personally, i suggest that we
> > should focus on clarifying the legitimacy of the source code. Some codes
> > ,with free license , the initial developers used in our project are mixed
> > with the code they wrote. So we had to isolate the free licensed code and
> > clarify the license. For the sake of convinience, the initial developers
> put
> > some libs, whose licenses conflict with ASL, in the source code. Of
> course,
> > we should also clear them out.
> > Second is the documentation. I checked the example the guideline shows-
> > http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/ and i found that we only miss the API
> > document. I suppose we could use doxygen to help us complete the API. I
> > don't think comments our code follow the rules of doxygen, so i recommend
> > that we could mend that when clarifying the legitimacy of the source
> code.
> >
> > Guys, here's my thought about next step.
> > 1:Clarify the legitimacy of the source code, meanwhile label the
> comment
> > which apt to generate API document by doxygen;
> > 2: use doxygen to create API documents;
> > 3: finish the relevant work a Release needs and make the first
> Release;
> > guys, what do you think about that ? Any suggestion?
> >
> > regards,
> > Kevin
> >
> > --
> > Bowen Ma a.k.a Samuel Kevin @ Bluesky Dev Team XJTU
> > Shaanxi Province Key Lab. of Satellite and Terrestrial Network Tech
> > http://incubator.apache.org/bluesky/
> >
>
--
Bowen Ma a.k.a Samuel Kevin @ Bluesky Dev Team XJTU
Shaanxi Province Key Lab. of Satellite and Terrestrial Network Tech
http://incubator.apache.org/bluesky/
Re: what we are doing and proposed next step
Posted by Bernd Fondermann <be...@googlemail.com>.
Doing a release is a good goal.
However, before looking deeper into the exact requirements for doing a
release, I'd like to see developers in action on the mailing list and
working on the code in svn as an open source project. I'm seeing none
of that currently. All this work would be directed towards a release,
but actually doing the release for me is more of a mid-term goal.
On a more general note - and I'm sorry to say that - I see the Bluesky
project on the edge of failure.
There are not enough active mentors on the project and no open
development is taking place.
Bernd
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 09:46, Samuel Kevin<lo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, All:
> After we solve the problem of FFmpeg, i guess our next goal is to make
> the first release. I've read through the whole page of guidlines of Release-
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html. Wow, it's quite
> large and to some extent, for me, ambiguous. The following is my
> understanding to Release.
>
> Release involves two things most. First is the code. We should guarantee
> both quality and the legitimacy under ASL. Personally, i suggest that we
> should focus on clarifying the legitimacy of the source code. Some codes
> ,with free license , the initial developers used in our project are mixed
> with the code they wrote. So we had to isolate the free licensed code and
> clarify the license. For the sake of convinience, the initial developers put
> some libs, whose licenses conflict with ASL, in the source code. Of course,
> we should also clear them out.
> Second is the documentation. I checked the example the guideline shows-
> http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/ and i found that we only miss the API
> document. I suppose we could use doxygen to help us complete the API. I
> don't think comments our code follow the rules of doxygen, so i recommend
> that we could mend that when clarifying the legitimacy of the source code.
>
> Guys, here's my thought about next step.
> 1:Clarify the legitimacy of the source code, meanwhile label the comment
> which apt to generate API document by doxygen;
> 2: use doxygen to create API documents;
> 3: finish the relevant work a Release needs and make the first Release;
> guys, what do you think about that ? Any suggestion?
>
> regards,
> Kevin
>
> --
> Bowen Ma a.k.a Samuel Kevin @ Bluesky Dev Team XJTU
> Shaanxi Province Key Lab. of Satellite and Terrestrial Network Tech
> http://incubator.apache.org/bluesky/
>