Hi Kai, Answers inline.
> 1. What version would we have for the release, some options from my > view: 1.0, 0.1, or 1.0-M1 and so on. I saw we just released Apache > Directory Server 2.0.0-M20, would Kerby project follow this style or > otherwise? M20 looks too long for a major release IMHO. > It's just a matter of personal preference I suppose. If it were up to me, I would call it 1.0.0, or possibly 1.0.0-M1 if you feel that it is not usable in production yet. > 2. What’s the artifacts we would have for the release? How about: > > 1) JARs (to be published): Client side Kerberos library in a jar; > KDC side Kerberos library in a jar; Kerby facilities (Netty, LDAP, > Zookeeper backends and so on) in a jar > We will just use Maven to drive the release process. Normally, for projects at Apache it's just a matter of "mvn release:prepare; mvn release:perform". This takes care of tagging the release, signing the jars, and uploading them to repository.apache.org, where you "close" them and get it ready for a vote. > 2) Kerby KDC distribution installation packages, a tar (client side > tools, server side services and tools, conf, doc and etc.) > Similar to above, we will need to build the distribution via maven. So it looks like there is some work to be done here. > 3. Would anyone take and help with the release? > I can help out, but not "take" the release as such :-) Colm. > > > Thanks for thinking about this. > > > > Regards, > > Kai > > > > *From:* Colm O hEigeartaigh [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Friday, April 24, 2015 7:01 PM > *To:* Apache Directory Developers List > *Subject:* Re: Kerby release > > > > > > That timeline seems fine to me. What I suggest is to create a new version > in the DIRKRB JIRA, and start assigning issues that must be fixed by the > first release to it. Other issues can leave the "fix for" version blank. > From what I've seen so far of the project, the following are essential: > > a) Sort out not-yet-commons-ssl dependency (perhaps this could be left out > altogether for the first release) > > b) Resolve all issues surrounding code copied into Kerby from other > projects (I think I've seen a few comments that indicate this) > > c) Support UDP in the transport handlers > > d) More robust error handling in the transport handlers > > e) More extensive interop testing with other APIs/KDCs > > Colm. > > > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Zheng, Kai <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks Colm for raising the question. > > > > From my point of view, many codes of the project are to be stabilized and > tested. I’m a little sad I can’t be on the project in good much time. In a > quick estimation, maybe in 2 months or so? Let’s see and try our best, > maybe in another month will leave us much clear and answer this question > well, J. How others would think? Thanks. > > > > Regards, > > Kai > > > > *From:* Colm O hEigeartaigh [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Friday, April 24, 2015 6:07 PM > *To:* Apache Directory Developers List > *Subject:* Kerby release > > > > When do we anticipate a first release of Apache Kerby? No pressure from my > side, just wondering what the timeline is. > > Colm. > > > > -- > > Colm O hEigeartaigh > > Talend Community Coder > http://coders.talend.com > > > > > -- > > Colm O hEigeartaigh > > Talend Community Coder > http://coders.talend.com > -- Colm O hEigeartaigh Talend Community Coder http://coders.talend.com
