Carlin--

 I'll take a pass through the release notes and prune items that are
noise for users (test infrastructure, etc).  I won't get to finalizing
a release this weekend but should be able to wrap it up the weekend of
the 18th.  Apologies for the delay...

Eddie


On 11/8/06, Carlin Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks for the fix to the release notes Eddie. Did anyone else have
anything to add or change in the release notes? Other thoughts?

Eddie, if there are no other changes to role into release notes, when
would you plan to "create and sign the release package"? Just curious.

Thanks,
Carlin

On 11/5/06, Carlin Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Eddie, All,
>
> SVN revision 471547 contains a first pass at the release notes for
> 1.0.2. Please take a moment to review and edit as needed. Thanks!
>
> Carlin
>
> On 11/5/06, Eddie O'Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Carlin--
> >
> >   Great -- thanks.  Nice work on the release so far.  I've twiddled
> > the appropriate stuff in JIRA to create a 1.0.2 release.
> >
> >   The rest of the release generally goes in this order:
> >
> > - create the release notes for the 1.0.2 release.  JIRA will help with
> > this; browse BEEHIVE in JIRA, click "Road Map", select "Release
> > Notes", and copy / paste the HTML output at the bottom of the page
> > into a releaseNotes.xml page in the release docuumentation
> > - create and sign the release package
> > - test the release package
> > - post the release package somewhere accessible to everyone for review
> > - VOTE :) for at least 3 days; repeat as necessary.
> >
> > Once the vote has passed, there are a few things left:
> > - update the website with a new download page
> > - update the website with a release announcement
> > - copy the release documentation to http://beehive.apache.org/docs/1.0.2
> > - add the JARs to the Maven repository
> > - copy the release JARs to http://dist.apache.org so that they're
> > copied to the ASF mirrors
> > - mark the release as shipped in JIRA
> >
> >   Do you have a signed key?  If not, I can create / sign the release 
package.
> >
> > Eddie
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 11/5/06, Carlin Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Eddie,
> > >
> > > I've made the changes to add the license and notice files to the
> > > beehive jars. Looked like both Struts and Ant placed these files in
> > > META-INF of their jars so I did the same.
> > >
> > > Anything else I can do before we create / sign a release package?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Carlin
> > >
> > > On 11/3/06, Carlin Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Eddie,
> > > >
> > > > Yes, that helps. Thanks for the reply as well as the feedback on my
> > > > earlier questions about the docs.
> > > >
> > > > Carlin
> > > >
> > > > On 11/3/06, Eddie O'Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > Carlin--
> > > > >
> > > > >    Seems like that change should be removed as well because it was a
> > > > > step along the way to the partial data set support in trunk.  The
> > > > > PagedDataSet class changed more from that SVN version.
> > > > >
> > > > >   Probably best to go back to before that work started.
> > > > >
> > > > > HTH.
> > > > > Eddie
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 11/2/06, Carlin Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > Eddie,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have another question about pulling the incomplete data grid
> > > > > > features from the branch. I should remove the "checkpoint work" you
> > > > > > did in the PagedDataSet class, etc. from revision 415150,
> > > > > > 
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/beehive-commits/200606.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > as well as the work in revision 431515, right? Or, did you want me 
to
> > > > > > leave that in?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Carlin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 11/2/06, Carlin Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hey Eddie,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I've made the initial branch and updated several reference of the
> > > > > > > release version number to 1.0.2. However, I have a couple of 
questions
> > > > > > > about some other files...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - doap_Beehive.rdf -   I have not yet modified the DOAP. Do we 
just
> > > > > > > modify <revision> field and update the <created> field when we 
roll
> > > > > > > out the release, or just the version in trunk? Do we need to 
remove
> > > > > > > some of the references to WSM in this file or clarify that it is a
> > > > > > > subproject?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - docs/maven-support.txt -   is this just a readme text file and
> > > > > > > should I update the versions at the bottom of the doc?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - POMs -     looks like these use a property for the beehive 
version, correct?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I haven't made any changes in beehive/site/... yet. I guess we 
wait
> > > > > > > until the release to update these.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'll start the work to remove incomplete data grid features in 
branch.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks for your help.
> > > > > > > Carlin
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 10/24/06, Carlin Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Excellent and thanks Eddie. After Wednesday sounds fine. I'm 
also
> > > > > > > > happy to help if that makes it easier for you.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Your idea of including the LICENSE file in all the jars sounds 
good as well.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Kind regards,
> > > > > > > > Carlin
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 10/23/06, Eddie O'Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >   Sure -- that'd definitely help.  As my slow replies probably
> > > > > > > > > indicate, I've been busy with some other things and haven't 
been
> > > > > > > > > super-active recently.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >   There are several tasks that need to happen for release:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > - branching
> > > > > > > > > - remove incomplete data grid features in branch
> > > > > > > > > - update version numbers in the documentation, build, and POMs
> > > > > > > > > - create / sign release package
> > > > > > > > > - vote on release package
> > > > > > > > > - publish approved binaries / maven distributables / 
refreshed documentation
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >   I'll be able to help with branching / data grid work after 
Wednesday
> > > > > > > > > and can take care of the release packaging / signing after 
that.  If
> > > > > > > > > you'd like to get started before then, take it away.  :)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >   One thing we should review is whether we need to include 
LICENSE
> > > > > > > > > files in all of our JARs.  My reading of this:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >   http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > indicates that we don't strictly need to do this -- but other 
projects
> > > > > > > > > are currently doing this so that the JARs are self-describing 
outside
> > > > > > > > > the context of the distribution package.  I'd be in favor of 
doing
> > > > > > > > > this work.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Eddie
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 10/16/06, Carlin Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hey Eddie,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I could volunteer by creating the branch and backing out 
the changes,
> > > > > > > > > > if that would help.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Are there other release tasks that you think some of us 
other folks in
> > > > > > > > > > the dev community should/could be doing?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Kind regards,
> > > > > > > > > > Carlin
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 10/16/06, Eddie O'Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >   #1 wouldn't be a lot of work and is basically just a 
couple of
> > > > > > > > > > > changes to revert.  AFAICT, that's my task unless someone 
else wants
> > > > > > > > > > > to volunteer.  :)
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >   The problem with shipping an incomplete feature is 
exposing
> > > > > > > > > > > unfinished and unfrozen APIs.  This means that the APIs 
could change
> > > > > > > > > > > in the future potentially breaking applications that used 
such
> > > > > > > > > > > features, and this doesn't seem desirable.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >   Plus, I tend to believe that patch releases should be 
as stable as
> > > > > > > > > > > possible to ensure continuity from a previously released 
version.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >   My $0.02.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Eddie
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On 10/16/06, Scott Musser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > How much work would there be in option #1?
> > > > > > > > > > > > Naturally it would be cleaner than option #2 but I 
agree with Carlin that
> > > > > > > > > > > > either option would work.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Finishing the partial data set support could then be 
finished when you have
> > > > > > > > > > > > time rather than rushing.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Would the impact of shipping incomplete data set 
support be disagreeable to
> > > > > > > > > > > > the rest of the community?
> > > > > > > > > > > > It would be useful to understand what will the 
ramifications of shipping
> > > > > > > > > > > > this incomplete feature might be.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/13/06, Carlin Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Eddie,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Are you thinking there would be some API changes in 
what you have for
> > > > > > > > > > > > > the datagrid partial data set support to make it 
fully baked or just
> > > > > > > > > > > > > some clean up? I'm not a binding vote but I'd be good 
with either 1 or
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 2 (if there's nothing drastic in API changes for data 
set support).
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Carlin
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/13/06, Eddie O'Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >   Hm -- a new release would be great except...
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >   I've started new feature work in trunk/ for 
supporting partial data
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > sets; this work isn't baked / frozen yet.  Some 
options:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > #1) branch, remove the partial data set support, 
and ship 1.0.2
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > #2) ship partial data set support as-is in 1.0.2
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > #3) finish partial data set support and then ship 
1.0.2
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >   Thoughts?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eddie
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Ken Tam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 for a 1.0.2 patch release
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/2/06, Rich Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Agreed -- seems like 1.0.2 to me...
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rich
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chad Schoettger wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems like a patch release to me.  We've 
fixed a lot of bugs --
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know that in the controls area there have 
been a number of bugs
> > > > > > > > > > > > > fixed
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which were found by users using Beehive from 
within an IDE (many
> > > > > > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > them APT related).  Also bugs releated to 
security and deadlocks
> > > > > > > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > been addressed as well.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it would be a good thing to get these 
fixes into a patch
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > release at this time.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  - Chad
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 9/28/06, Carlin Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> I was wondering about the scheduling of the 
next beehive release.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> There's been more than 65 bugs and 
improvements fixed along with
> > > > > > > > > > > > > a few
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> smaller new features. Some of these seem 
like good improvements
> > > > > > > > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> 1.0.1 and worth getting out to the user 
community. This includes
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> things like a security fix and some page 
flow deadlock fixes as
> > > > > > > > > > > > > well.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> What are the thoughts on whether this would 
be a patch release (
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.0.2)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> or a point release (1.1)? Just curious what 
folks where thinking
> > > > > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> getting a discussion started.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Kind regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Carlin
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to