qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rafael Schloming <rafa...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Qpid M2 Release
Date Tue, 06 Mar 2007 16:52:55 GMT
Martin Ritchie wrote:
> Can the Authors of the Ruby/Python speak for its current state? If we
> are to release python and ruby clients then all the clients should
> interop.

Python should be good to go once the interop issues mentioned in another 
thread are addressed. To my knowledge it's been a few months since 
anyone has done anything with Ruby, so I'm rechecking whether it still 
works now. I'll send an email when I have more info.

--Rafael

> 
> On 06/03/07, Das, Kapali Tejeswar <tejeswar.das@iona.com> wrote:
>> +1 from me.
>>
>> Regards
>> Tejeswar
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Marnie McCormack [mailto:marnie.mccormack@googlemail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 6:41 AM
>> To: qpid-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: [VOTE] Qpid M2 Release
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I there are now some compelling motivations for releasing an M2.
>>
>> I'd like to propose an M2, to include:
>>
>> - Java Broker
>> - Java Client
>> - C++ Broker
>> - C++ Client
>> - .NET Client
>>
>> I can speak with more authority on some areas than others, but here's my
>> quick summary of major changes since M1:
>>
>> - the Java Client/Broker pass the SUN TCK making our offering in this
>> area
>> much more attractive
>> - the persistence rework on the Java broker is complete and
>> significantly
>> advances the functionality
>> - the C++ broker is ready for some real use and should get out there for
>> early adopters
>> - the C++ client interop has been worked upon/used quite a bit in dev
>> - the .NET client has been substantially extended and interop improved
>> - and a lot of JIRAs resolved on all front, bugs and improvements
>>
>> We also need to introduce a new AMQP protocol version across the board,
>> and
>> it makes good sense to get M2 out there before we do this.
>>
>> I think we also considered releasing the python and ruby for M1, but
>> there
>> were gaps in the docs etc. I'm happy that we should include these in M2,
>> assuming someone is willing to contribute the required docs etc (and
>> they
>> interop).
>>
>> I'd like to structure our initial vote as follows:
>>
>> - M2 Release including Java, C++ and .NET
>> - Additionally python and ruby
>>
>> Let's vote first to get an idea of the consensus and then we can create
>> threads on release manager, dates, code freezes etc.
>>
>> We have quite a bit of work to consider/do prior to release including
>> interop testing, docs etc. Happy to raise JIRAs (or assist the release
>> manager) for an M2 set of tasks if we proceed.
>>
>> *Votes please :*
>>
>> *[ ] M2 Release inc Java, C++, .NET
>> [ ] Python and Ruby clients
>>
>> *And here is my +1 for all both.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Marnie
>>
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message