Thanks for the response (even while on vacation!) ... and for
volunteering to be the release manager. Your response helps me get a
better picture of the plans.
I was really just interested in the general objectives and timing since
it hadn't been discussed yet. To get the release out in Feb means it
will be delivered next week. I'm afraid the hill might be a little too
steep to climb that quickly but I'm happy to be proven wrong.
The more communication the better. It's important to get everybody
thinking and planning along the same lines (or understand quickly if
there are any differences of opinion). Knowing that you are thinking of
creating a release candidate next week means that we should be getting
more restrictive on new content to avoid any unpleasant surprises.
I don't have any strong opinions on what should be in or out - but in
general it doesn't make sense to release things that aren't functional.
At the moment I'm not sure what those are - but I suspect not all of the
components are fully functional yet (for example transaction).
Best Regards,
Joe
Jeremy Hughes wrote:
Hi Joe, sorry I started setting myself up tuesday but am now out on
vacation until monday.
Personally, I think the 0.1 release should serve to get what we have
right now in the respectable form the ASF requires. So 'must haves'
are to get the build in the right shape to create the distribution
files that are acceptable to the IPMC. I think each main area of the
code deserves at least a README to describe what's possible. Since
this is the first release there are likely a few unknowns - w.r.t
timing I hope/expect to get the release out this in feb. If there are
particular JIRAs or other issues you feel should be included please
say. I'd like to rename the current JIRA version 1.0 to 0.1 and target
issues for 0.1 appropriately and issues not for 0.1 to target a new
0.2 version. WDYT?
Cheers,
Jeremy
On 18 February 2010 15:39, Joe Bohn <[email protected]> wrote:
Jeremy,
What are your current thoughts and goals regarding the release and potential
target dates?
I think it would be good if you could summarize your thoughts in an email or
perhaps on a page in the wiki that we can keep updated as we make progress.
Of particular interest would be the content that we would like to see in
the first release (clarifying what we consider "must have" from "nice to
have"), the current status of that content, target dates for the release,
and the process that we plan to use to generate the release.
Thanks,
Joe
Jeremy Hughes wrote:
On 12 February 2010 09:39, Guillaume Nodet <[email protected]> wrote:
Great, thanks a lot. Let us know if you need any help.
I guess if you take some notes, it would be interesting to put those
on the wiki.
Certainly will. It's been a while since I did one and the process has
changed quite a bit :-)
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:32, Jeremy Hughes <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Kevan, thanks. I volunteer to be release manager.
Jeremy
On 11 February 2010 16:38, Kevan Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
Sounds like the consensus is for a release with all components at a 0.1
version number. Best to start with a simple versioning scheme, IMO.
Personally, I don't view a 0.1 blueprint release as an issue.
Showing the ability to generate an Apache release is an important step
for the community. Would definitely like to see this happen...
We'll need a release manager. Any volunteers?
--kevan
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com
--
Joe
--
Joe
