-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 0.91 is a real number and it indicates also our intention to release 1.0 in the near future. As for GSOC contributions, I would favor having the GSOC participants take the lead on any integration, testing, etc with the trunk.
Marlon On 9/30/13 11:04 AM, Amila Jayasekara wrote: > On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Marlon Pierce <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > I'd be concerned about the quality of production testing for releasese > if we just include an embedded server. I think Rave hit this > problem--everyone tested the simplified version packaged for the > release, but there were a lot bugs and other problems that appeared when > trying to use it in a more realistic deployment. > > I think it is better to come up with a packaging strategy that is simple > enough for testing but also reasonably realistic. > > > > +1. I am also negative to only release server distribution. Most of the > > real deployment scenarios use a separate web server to deploy Airavata. > > Further certain functionalities cannot be tested at stand alone version. > > (E.g :- credential store). Therefore we should keep the war distribution. > > > Anyhow there is a blocking issue [1] for the release related to > > distribution size. So we must find a solution for this. (Best thing is to > > unify war distributions and get rid of duplicate jars) > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRAVATA-922 > > > Saminda had been making changes to REST API to incorporate workflow > > execution. Are we planning to make that change available in this release ? > > If so we can get rid of some of SOAP based services. (If this is taking > > place we can unify wars also). Saminda please give feedback on this. > > > Also what about code we inherit from GSOC project ? Are we planning to > > incorporate them to release ? > > > Further for the upcoming release it will be better if we do not include > > many features. Because there are couple of lingering Jira tickets which we > > have been postponing. Its better to fix some of those in hackathon mode > > before the release. > > > @Marlon : Any particular reason why you prefer 0.91 rather than 0.10 ? > > (0.10 is what we have assigned right now) > > > Thanks > > Thejaka Amila > > > > > > Marlon > > On 9/30/13 10:30 AM, Raminder Singh wrote: > >>> Problem is not releasing both tar and zip. Problem is size of the war > distribution file which contain > 2 war files (airavata-server.war and airavata-registry.war). Both the > war files have lib jars and increase its size more than 100MB. Apache > limit of 100MB is per file. I think we should only release tar and zip > with embedded server to get started. Creating and deploying of WARs can > be documented for production users. WDYT? > >>> > >>> Thanks > >>> Raminder > >>> > >>> On Sep 30, 2013, at 10:02 AM, Supun Kamburugamuva <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > >>>> I've noticed you are releasing both a tar and a zip for all the > distribution artifacts. I've seen lot of people only releasing a zip or > a tar and not both. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Supun.. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Saminda Wijeratne > <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> reducing the release footprint should also be a priority IMO. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 12:07 PM, Raminder Singh <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>> Airavata 0.9 is released now and Marlon mentioned a timeline for 1.0 > is Mid Nov. How do we want to handle next release? > >>>> > >>>> Some of the features required for the projects i work with are: > >>>> > >>>> GSISSH Provider > >>>> Async execution of Applications and implement your own monitor. > >>>> > >>>> Lets discuss a timeline and plan for next release and as well as for > 1.0. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks > >>>> Raminder > >>>> > >>>> On Sep 13, 2013, at 3:06 PM, Marlon Pierce <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hi all-- > >>>>> > >>>>> Airavata 0.9 is pending, we also would like to have 1.0 in time for > >>>>> Supercomputing 2013 (November 15th), and we have been trying to get > down > >>>>> to ~6 week releases. We have 9 weeks until SC13. > >>>>> > >>>>> I suggest we do the following: > >>>>> > >>>>> * Get 0.9 out over the next couple of days. There are no blocking > issues. > >>>>> > >>>>> * Define 0.91 or 0.10 release next week and target completion in 4 for > >>>>> ~October 11th. > >>>>> > >>>>> * Define and complete 1.0 release for November 15th. The primary goal > >>>>> for 1.0 is to have the API stable. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Marlon > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Supun Kamburugamuva > >>>> Member, Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org > >>>> E-mail: [email protected]; Mobile: +1 812 369 6762 > >>>> Blog: http://supunk.blogspot.com > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >> >> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSSZmZAAoJEOEgD2XReDo5PyMH/0sBqjLWZDAw2hEWbE41VvVC Jb5VLpgy6iBAqT8nJxRCy1tO22tB/t0SYOT1NVV/LaUMFrqNM1/lCK8ru251Gf4/ a0c4nCMeR+ItLo6uCLSfIC90plNmc2NOHbmiFGNbZCtSfVEnDVo86oVF/OxahLZs 9csQ6bkeZWhNCm98WRDEhGQzSaHpu7qyyL9IGO2spOwPafDQvpiP7jf587h15vSj LfK2Fcf00X8ZIgJBQD5E9//iiBCDQyFW/9WQWV3Mz2UWKJktkA6wMJG2JO5PKcxK Haj4zyxaYfioN3k+CTyce+5+UyK0tr80qwvHzHsIc81ZrfViaCwZ2Ds6VlJt9qs= =m+hz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
