On 9/20/10 11:21 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 2:38 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny<[email protected]>wrote:
That's all what I had in mind when I asked Alex to do that in a branch : I
was scared that it can break the schedule we are trying to set :/
May be I'm wrong, or just extra cautious, I don't know...
Let's play it safe and get the release out without worrying about this
additional factor.
We are talking about the release of shared, not the server, here.
I was also thinking about the general layout of packages/classes etc,
and we may have to careful review them before releasing the final 1.0
version, because then we are dead for years !
IMO, the very first step (once we have fixed the last few pb we have
with the GSSAPI) would be to release shared-0.9.20
Then we will have a few time to get all of it reviewed (I have started
that 2 weeks ago, cleaning up around 80 files out of 800) and eventually
adding OSGi stuff around it.
At this point, shared is now 7 modules, and I really don't see why we
should keep shared-ldap-jndi and shared-ldap-schema separate.
If we have a look at shared-ldap, then it's immediate that we may have
to move out some packages and rename some others :
- o.a.d.s.ldap.shared.converter.schema should be more likely
o.a.d.s.ldap.shared.schema.converter
- o.a.d.s.ldap.shared.csn should be in another package with entry,
subtree, sp, aci, filter and cursor : they are LDAP internal objects,
distinct from messages, ldif or schema. May be something like
o.a.d.s.ldap.shared.objects ?
- o.a.d.s.ldap.shared.name could also be part of the previous package
(o.a.d.s.ldap.shared.objects)
In other words, I *know* for sure we have to reorganize those guys, and
I really think we should release before starting moving around those
guys more, or adding more features in it.
We can define a schedule for that we can all agreed on, and get it done
quickly, don't you think so ?
--
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
