>> Everything that's not under "contrib" should have at least one official >>release.
Just to be clear, im going to be voting -1 on any legacy client release. The legacy client can be downloaded and supported here: https://github.com/OpenDDRdotORG/OpenDDR-Java The above project can be the branch you are talking about. I dont see any value or upside in re-releasing another legacy client branch under DeviceMap. Have any of the issues [0] been resolved? What about the pull requests [1]? Lots of reasons to move on from this client. Then we have the fact that 2.0 will render it obsolete. [0] https://github.com/OpenDDRdotORG/OpenDDR-Java/issues [1] https://github.com/OpenDDRdotORG/OpenDDR-Java/pulls From: Werner Keil <[email protected]> To: [email protected]; Reza Naghibi <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, January 1, 2015 12:25 PM Subject: Re: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DMAP-112 Everything that's not under "contrib" should have at least one official release. That's why I suggested to move the "test-data" folder into /contrib (unless we agree it shall better be deleted from /trunk?) On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Werner Keil <[email protected]> wrote: OK thanks. DDR Simple 1.0.0 is ready for release pretty much as of now. A few minor improvements include using only Log4J 2 instead of SLF4J ("Eat your own Dogfood" at Apache if you want, all examples are already migrated;-) The only dependency is Data 1.0.1 or above, aside from the embedded W3C JAR. A combined Examples project 1.0.0 shall follow. Demonstrating all Java libraries. Ideally we should have Jenkins CI sessions for 1.x and later 2.x branches of all relevant artifacts, at least "Java" and "Examples". The Java 8 glitch showed, we must have more than just Java 6 even if this is the minimal JVM version we support until further notice;-) Werner On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Reza Naghibi <[email protected]> wrote: Ok, just making sure. So here is my rough roadmap: -Jan 2015 - release data 1.0.2-Q2 2015, release data 1.0.3-Q3 to Q4, release data and client 2.0 From: Werner Keil <[email protected]> To: [email protected]; Reza Naghibi <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, January 1, 2015 12:05 PM Subject: Re: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DMAP-112 That's why it is slated for a 1.0 release (regardless of maturity but it goes along with 1.x of the data files) and it does not need to be compatible with any 2.0 data changes in future.Whether or not we maintain 2 branches of data, guess time shall tell. Patches or fixes that can be applied maybe, but like with other vendors (DeviceAtlas, 52DegreesMobi or ScienteMobile/WURFL) they may not maintain 2 parallel repositories forever. Werner On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Reza Naghibi <[email protected]> wrote: I understand. What is the roadmap for the legacy client? Just so you are aware, 2.0 data release will remove the notion of a builder from the data. How will the legacy client evolve to support this? Take a look at this: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/devicemap/trunk/devicemap/java/simpleddr/src/main/java/org/apache/devicemap/simpleddr/builder/?pathrev=1648789 Go into the os, browser, and device. There is no way 2.0 data can maintain support for this kind of builder architecture. Are you aware of this? From: Werner Keil <[email protected]> To: [email protected]; Reza Naghibi <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, January 1, 2015 11:48 AM Subject: Re: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DMAP-112 Well, it's just a fact, the W3C Simple implementation shall be released as 1.0 according to a discussion we had a long time ago. It's been around and stable almost ever since OpenDDR donated it and that has not changed.The only reason it was not released was an incompatible change (bug) you slipped into a Data release 1.x where packages of builders were named improperly.This was fixed with 1.0,1, thus nothing prevents a release of the DDR artifact. There is no rift, we have a .NET client (which is barely maintained, but that's another issue) and a new direction which allows more flexibility in the "Cloud", e.g. retrrieving device data from various sources. That's something W3C did not consider important, so the location of the data source has to be fixed, that's the only real drawback of the W3C DDR implementation. It could only be fixed in the W3C code we don't own;-) I trust the PMC is wise enough to release the W3C DDR implementation, because not only examples depend on it. And it provides functionality and recognition power the "New Cloud" client will not get until V 2.0 as you also said. It does not matter if that happens in JIRA or the mailing list, JIRA is also transparent and allows us to see what's been done;) Cheers,Werner On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Reza Naghibi <[email protected]> wrote: So I don't want to have discussions in JIRA, so Werner, can you please elaborate on your last point in this thread: "Indicates, while not in direct competition, the "older" W3C one is a bit more mature and stable." https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DMAP-112 The reason im asking you to elaborate is because as a PMC member, I would like to better understand your thoughts on this project, its mission statement, and where we are going with our data and API development. Im concerned because you seem to be building a rift in this project in regard to old API vs new API. This is not going to be good for the health of the project so this is an attempt to better understand your views and feeling towards the project and the direction we are going in. This is important because you are someone who actively promotes and markets this project.
