+1 just move forward. The only thought I have is to do a Studio release with current ApacheDS and API version, I wanted to do since weeks it but didn't find the time and won't have time in the next 2 weeks either.
Kind Regards, Stefan On 08/03/2017 02:03 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote: > Hi guys, > > > I didn't had time last week-end to post this mail. > > We have released the Apache LDAP API 1.0 a few weeks ago. This was a > great acomplishment, after years of efforts. It was not perfect, but > still, 'good enough' is probably the correct description. > > > Beside this effort, I started to work on a branch > (http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/directory/shared/branches/shared-value/) > which was a refactoring of the Value class, in order to simplify what we > had in 1.0. The rational was to get some major errors being fixed in > ApacheDS (mainly related to some special chars being mis-handled in > DNs). The consequences are huge in term of performances (20% faster), > but impacts the projects using this API. > > > At this point, I'd like to suggest we start with a 2.0 because of those > API changes. FTR, I ave carrefully ported all the changes made in 1.0 to > the branch, and I also have a branch for Apacheds which relies on the > API branch. What remains to be done is to switch to this branch for Studio. > > > So let's thing bigger : If we go for a 2.0, I also suggest we move to > Java 8 only for this version (I mean, Java 8 and higher). ApacheDS will > also switch to Java 8 and will use this API 2.0 in M25, and teh next > Studio release should also use the API 2.0 and ApacheDS with API 2.0. > > > I would also suggest we switch to git for the API, now that 1.0 is out. > SVN is outdated, and it's quite an anchor for us anyway (I have to use > svn *and* git daily, it makes things more complex...). Nor sure we > should'nt move to git for all teh projects, but startng wih teh API > sounds reasonable atm. In any case, I'll write another mail for this change. > > > I'd like to have your opinion about those proposed changes, before > starting an official vote. > > > Many thanks ! > >
