beehive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Carlin Rogers" <carlin.rog...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: a new patch release [was: Re: Question about the next release...]
Date Fri, 03 Nov 2006 02:16:13 GMT
Hey Eddie,

I've made the initial branch and updated several reference of the
release version number to 1.0.2. However, I have a couple of questions
about some other files...

- doap_Beehive.rdf -   I have not yet modified the DOAP. Do we just
modify <revision> field and update the <created> field when we roll
out the release, or just the version in trunk? Do we need to remove
some of the references to WSM in this file or clarify that it is a
subproject?

- docs/maven-support.txt -   is this just a readme text file and
should I update the versions at the bottom of the doc?

- POMs -     looks like these use a property for the beehive version, correct?

I haven't made any changes in beehive/site/... yet. I guess we wait
until the release to update these.

I'll start the work to remove incomplete data grid features in branch.

Thanks for your help.
Carlin

On 10/24/06, Carlin Rogers <carlin.rogers@gmail.com> wrote:
> Excellent and thanks Eddie. After Wednesday sounds fine. I'm also
> happy to help if that makes it easier for you.
>
> Your idea of including the LICENSE file in all the jars sounds good as well.
>
> Kind regards,
> Carlin
>
> On 10/23/06, Eddie O'Neil <ekoneil@gmail.com> wrote:
> >   Sure -- that'd definitely help.  As my slow replies probably
> > indicate, I've been busy with some other things and haven't been
> > super-active recently.
> >
> >   There are several tasks that need to happen for release:
> >
> > - branching
> > - remove incomplete data grid features in branch
> > - update version numbers in the documentation, build, and POMs
> > - create / sign release package
> > - vote on release package
> > - publish approved binaries / maven distributables / refreshed documentation
> >
> >   I'll be able to help with branching / data grid work after Wednesday
> > and can take care of the release packaging / signing after that.  If
> > you'd like to get started before then, take it away.  :)
> >
> >   One thing we should review is whether we need to include LICENSE
> > files in all of our JARs.  My reading of this:
> >
> >   http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html
> >
> > indicates that we don't strictly need to do this -- but other projects
> > are currently doing this so that the JARs are self-describing outside
> > the context of the distribution package.  I'd be in favor of doing
> > this work.
> >
> > Eddie
> >
> > On 10/16/06, Carlin Rogers <carlin.rogers@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hey Eddie,
> > >
> > > I could volunteer by creating the branch and backing out the changes,
> > > if that would help.
> > >
> > > Are there other release tasks that you think some of us other folks in
> > > the dev community should/could be doing?
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > > Carlin
> > >
> > > On 10/16/06, Eddie O'Neil <ekoneil@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >   #1 wouldn't be a lot of work and is basically just a couple of
> > > > changes to revert.  AFAICT, that's my task unless someone else wants
> > > > to volunteer.  :)
> > > >
> > > >   The problem with shipping an incomplete feature is exposing
> > > > unfinished and unfrozen APIs.  This means that the APIs could change
> > > > in the future potentially breaking applications that used such
> > > > features, and this doesn't seem desirable.
> > > >
> > > >   Plus, I tend to believe that patch releases should be as stable as
> > > > possible to ensure continuity from a previously released version.
> > > >
> > > >   My $0.02.
> > > >
> > > > Eddie
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 10/16/06, Scott Musser <scott.musser@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > How much work would there be in option #1?
> > > > > Naturally it would be cleaner than option #2 but I agree with Carlin
that
> > > > > either option would work.
> > > > > Finishing the partial data set support could then be finished when
you have
> > > > > time rather than rushing.
> > > > > Would the impact of shipping incomplete data set support be disagreeable
to
> > > > > the rest of the community?
> > > > > It would be useful to understand what will the ramifications of shipping
> > > > > this incomplete feature might be.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/13/06, Carlin Rogers <carlin.rogers@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hey Eddie,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Are you thinking there would be some API changes in what you
have for
> > > > > > the datagrid partial data set support to make it fully baked
or just
> > > > > > some clean up? I'm not a binding vote but I'd be good with either
1 or
> > > > > > 2 (if there's nothing drastic in API changes for data set support).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Carlin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/13/06, Eddie O'Neil <ekoneil@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >   Hm -- a new release would be great except...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >   I've started new feature work in trunk/ for supporting
partial data
> > > > > > > sets; this work isn't baked / frozen yet.  Some options:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > #1) branch, remove the partial data set support, and ship
1.0.2
> > > > > > > #2) ship partial data set support as-is in 1.0.2
> > > > > > > #3) finish partial data set support and then ship 1.0.2
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >   Thoughts?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Eddie
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Ken Tam <kentaminator@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > +1 for a 1.0.2 patch release
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 10/2/06, Rich Feit <richfeit@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Agreed -- seems like 1.0.2 to me...
> > > > > > > > > Rich
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Chad Schoettger wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > It seems like a patch release to me.  We've
fixed a lot of bugs --
> > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > > know that in the controls area there have
been a number of bugs
> > > > > > fixed
> > > > > > > > > > which were found by users using Beehive
from within an IDE (many
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > them APT related).  Also bugs releated to
security and deadlocks
> > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > been addressed as well.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I think it would be a good thing to get
these fixes into a patch
> > > > > > > > > > release at this time.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  - Chad
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 9/28/06, Carlin Rogers <carlin.rogers@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >> I was wondering about the scheduling
of the next beehive release.
> > > > > > > > > >> There's been more than 65 bugs and improvements
fixed along with
> > > > > > a few
> > > > > > > > > >> smaller new features. Some of these
seem like good improvements
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > >> 1.0.1 and worth getting out to the user
community. This includes
> > > > > > > > > >> things like a security fix and some
page flow deadlock fixes as
> > > > > > well.
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> What are the thoughts on whether this
would be a patch release (
> > > > > > 1.0.2)
> > > > > > > > > >> or a point release (1.1)? Just curious
what folks where thinking
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > >> getting a discussion started.
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> Kind regards,
> > > > > > > > > >> Carlin
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
View raw message