+1 To all Except

I agree with Rich on the stable APIs.  This is really the last chance
to cleanup and refactor the API set before we have to maintain
backward compatibility.  What I prefer is a system where we have a set
of Wiki pages that describe API changes in the common APIs, and also
have a Jira issue that tracks describes the changes.


On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 18:40:13 -0700, Richard Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1 from me!  Subitems:
>     1. +1
>     2. +1 for 0.8.0
>     3. +1 on everything except the "stable APIs" item.  I think we need
> more time with some of our APIs before calling them "stable".  Some of
> this might fall under "polish" as we ramp down towards 1.0 .  I don't
> expect everything to undergo radical change, but I'm personally not
> comfortable with any sort of loosey-goosey back-compat guarantee.  I
> might be willing to identify certain APIs as "not stable", if that would
> help.  Thoughts?
> 
> Thanks,
> Rich
> 
> Ken Tam wrote:
> 
> >We should do a Beta1 public distribution release.  Here's why:
> >
> >a) Beehive as essentially feature complete for v1 -- on that basis alone
> >it seems an appropriate time to release another public distribution.
> >While I don't think we're prepared to unequivocally state that APIs are
> >actually frozen, it's fair to say that we expect only minor changes
> >between now and GA.
> >b) The last distribution release we did was several months ago (alpha)
> >and we've made huge strides since then.  A release now will make it much
> >easier for users to engage and provide a formal label for filing
> >issues/having discussions.
> >c) EclipseCon and TheServerSide Symposium are both just around the
> >corner, it would be great to have fresh downloadable bits available in
> >time for that (Feb 28-Mar 3, Mar 3-5 respectively).
> >
> >Question 1:
> >Should we aim to produce a public distro release for Feb 28/2005?
> >
> >Question 2:
> >Shall we call it Beta1 and version it as 0.8.z?  We're definitely closer
> >to the end than to the beginning.
> >
> >Question 3:
> >Can we agree on the following goals for this release?
> >
> >Goals:
> >Feature complete
> >APIs highly stable (weak guarantee of back compat)
> >Updated docs/samples
> >Provide a reference point for bug reporting/discussion
> >Dogfoodable for app building
> >
> >Non-goals:
> >Strong guarantee of backwards compat
> >Usable for production
> >Completed docs/samples
> >
> >Please vote ASAP, we do not have a lot of time to do this :)
> >
> >Thanks!
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to