Hi Lukas,

As you probably saw I committed the extra fixes last night so I think we’re now 
all set for the 0.3 release.

Regards,

Gavin



On 31 Mar 2014, at 17:03, Gavin Cornwell <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Lukas,
> 
> I’m going to retract that statement, we have found some more occurrences of 
> the issue in CMISFolder and a couple in CMISSession.
> 
> Please continue to hold off the release until tomorrow.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Gavin
> 
> 
> 
> On 31 Mar 2014, at 16:40, Gavin Cornwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Lukas,
>> 
>> The issue with cancelling create operations is resolved and the fix 
>> committed.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Gavin
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 31 Mar 2014, at 15:48, Gross, Lukas <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Gavin,
>>> 
>>> Sure - just drop me an email when you have fixed the issue :)
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Lukas
>>> 
>>> On 3/31/14 3:51 PM, "Gavin Cornwell" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi Lukas,
>>>> 
>>>> I’ve found another bug (uploads do not cancel) that would be really good
>>>> to be fixed before we do the 0.3 release.
>>>> 
>>>> I’m testing a solution right now, can you please hold off the release
>>>> until I’ve committed the fix?
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Gavin
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 28 Mar 2014, at 08:29, Gavin Cornwell <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sounds great, many thanks Lukas.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Gavin
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 28 Mar 2014, at 07:50, Gross, Lukas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> We have some minor fixes on our side that I'm going to commit today.
>>>>>> I will take care of the 0.3 release next week.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Lukas
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 3/27/14 12:29 PM, "Gavin Cornwell" <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I have run through all the tests on our side and found a couple of
>>>>>>> minor
>>>>>>> issues that I addressed yesterday (project settings and a progress
>>>>>>> issue).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> There is still an Xcode warning/suggestion on the project settings
>>>>>>> (when
>>>>>>> using Xcode 5.1) which caused a problem building with Xcode 5.0 so
>>>>>>> I’ve
>>>>>>> left them as they were for now. The 64 bit slice is being included in
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> binary so I think this will be fine for this release.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Unless you have a different opinion on the project settings I think
>>>>>>> we’re
>>>>>>> ready for the 0.3 release.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Gavin
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 25 Mar 2014, at 15:24, Gavin Cornwell <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> There’s one more thing to check on our side before giving the green
>>>>>>>> light for 0.3, I will work on that tomorrow and let you know as soon
>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>> I can.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Gavin
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 25 Mar 2014, at 06:38, Gross, Lukas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Alright then. Just give me you OK when everything is ready for 0.3
>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>> your side. I will then do the release.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Whenever you are ready for the initial browser binding checkin
>>>>>>>>> please
>>>>>>>>> let
>>>>>>>>> me know so that we can have a look and discuss the further approach
>>>>>>>>> :)
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Lukas
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On 3/24/14 11:14 AM, "Gavin Cornwell" <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Sounds good to me, I just need to check here that there isn¹t
>>>>>>>>>> anything
>>>>>>>>>> else required for 0.3, the guy I need to ask is beck from holiday
>>>>>>>>>> tomorrow so I¹ll send a response tomorrow if that¹s OK?
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> If you don¹t mind doing the release that is absolutely fine with me
>>>>>>>>>> ;-)
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Regarding the browser binding, I created the branch over the
>>>>>>>>>> weekend
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> have merged the work I did previously into that locally. There is
>>>>>>>>>> still
>>>>>>>>>> some work to do before I¹m happy doing an initial commit, but I
>>>>>>>>>> plan
>>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>> doing that in the evenings this week so I should have something to
>>>>>>>>>> contribute soon.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Gavin
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On 21 Mar 2014, at 16:46, Gross, Lukas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Excellent thats also our opinion. However ACL write support is
>>>>>>>>>>> not on
>>>>>>>>>>> our
>>>>>>>>>>> list for the next weeks, so I would rather do a release now and
>>>>>>>>>>> then
>>>>>>>>>>> concentrate on Browser Binding.
>>>>>>>>>>> Do you want me to do the release? Please let me know how you want
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> proceed.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Lukas
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/21/14 12:29 PM, "Gavin Cornwell"
>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think yes, we should target the 0.3 release without the browser
>>>>>>>>>>>> binding.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> We will probably need a 0.3 release sooner than 3-4 months (most
>>>>>>>>>>>> likely
>>>>>>>>>>>> in the next month) and I will only be able to work on the browser
>>>>>>>>>>>> binding
>>>>>>>>>>>> as a background task in my spare time.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> My preference therefore would be to finish your ACL write
>>>>>>>>>>>> features
>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>> release that as 0.3 and then have a 0.4 release for the browser
>>>>>>>>>>>> binding
>>>>>>>>>>>> support.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think?
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Gavin
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 20 Mar 2014, at 13:01, Gross, Lukas <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The main question is: Do we target a 0.3 release without browser
>>>>>>>>>>>>> binding
>>>>>>>>>>>>> or do we plan to get browser binding done first. From our side
>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>> depends on the timeframe in which we can get this done. If we
>>>>>>>>>>>>> could
>>>>>>>>>>>>> get
>>>>>>>>>>>>> this done within lets say the next 2 to 3 months I would prefer
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> bundle
>>>>>>>>>>>>> everything together and release 0.3. If you think we need longer
>>>>>>>>>>>>> than
>>>>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>>>>> should consider moving browser binding to 0.4. However we have a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> strong
>>>>>>>>>>>>> demand for browser binding and therefore plan to have at least
>>>>>>>>>>>>> one
>>>>>>>>>>>>> person
>>>>>>>>>>>>> working full-time on this topic.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The only other thing currently in our pipeline is write support
>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ACLs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> We recently committed the parser for read support however write
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> still
>>>>>>>>>>>>> missing. We plan to do this also during the next weeks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lukas
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/20/14 10:27 AM, "Gavin Cornwell"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Excellent, a 0.3 release would also be really useful for us
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would suggest doing a release sooner rather than later, what
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation tasks are there from your side that would need
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> done
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> before 0.3?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gav
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 20 Mar 2014, at 07:58, Gross, Lukas <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree that it would be more consistent to have only the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> request
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> object
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to cancel a request. I will change our code to use the request
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> objects
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cancel method and then remove the stop parameter from the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> library.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We had problems using Google hangout in the past, however we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> give
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> another try. Just let me know when you have setup the branch
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> schedule a session.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We should also discuss the timeframe for the upcoming
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tasks
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so that we can plan the Objective CMIS 0.3 release. We need
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release as early as possible so that we can get an approval
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lukas
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/19/14 10:21 PM, "Gavin Cornwell"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I do see your point about the stop parameter being a common
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> paradigm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> iOS, however, personally I would prefer that we remove it,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> especially
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the request approach works. We then have one consistent way
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cancel
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operations across the whole library (the parameter approach
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> applicable to methods with progress).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Great to hear you're also interested in the browser binding.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> did
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> initial work a while ago so I need to sync it with the recent
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll commit it in a branch as soon as I can.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I too think it would be a great idea to resurrect the status
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> meeting,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even if it's just once a month. I will schedule something
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> once
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> committed something. Can you remind me, are you guys able to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hangouts or would webex be a better choice?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gavin
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 

Reply via email to