>
> Regards,
> Alin Dreghiciu
>
> On 5/21/07, Richard S. Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Tim Moloney wrote:
>> > I agree with the proposed roadmap. My only comment is on the
name of
>> > the plugin. bundleplugin doesn't follow the Maven convention of
>> > maven-foo-plugin or foo-maven-plugin.
>>
>> Is there some reason for this convention? It ends up violating our
own
>> convention of naming generated artifacts after their own package root
in
>> our repo (e.g., org.apache.felix.bundleplugin-0.9.0.jar).
>>
>> If the general view is that we should follow this convention (which I
>> wasn't aware of), then I will change it back.
>>
>> -> richard
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > Richard S. Hall wrote:
>> >> Richard S. Hall wrote:
>> >>> Carlos Sanchez wrote:
>> >>>> A release as TLP is very important as it's going to be available
in
>> >>>> the main maven repository instead of the incubating one which
other
>> >>>> projects can't use to make releases.
>> >>>> I'd love to see the release of the bundle plugin to use it in
the
>> >>>> Maven project.
>> >>>
>> >>> The maven-bundle-plugin would be included in the release since it
is
>> >>> used by the framework and the shell bundles.
>> >>>
>> >>> Actually, I have been wanting to 1) change the plugin to be a
>> >>> top-level subproject in the svn repo, which would also mean 2)
>> >>> changing its package (from
>> >>> org.apache.felix.framework.tools.maven2.bundleplugin to
>> >>> org.apache.felix.bundleplugin), and I would also 3) like to
change
>> >>> its name from maven-bundle-plugin to perhaps just bundleplugin.
>> >>
>> >> Ok, rather than just say that I want to do the above, I decided to
>> >> just go ahead and do it. I have moved maven-bundle-plugin to the
>> >> trunk directory, renamed it to bundleplugin (and artifactId to
>> >> org.apache.felix.bundleplugin), changed its package structure, and
>> >> updated all POM files that used the plugin to refer to the new
name
>> >> (thanks to Karl for a shell script to do that). I rebuilt
everything
>> >> from scratch with an empty repo and it build for me...and I made
Karl
>> >> try it too.
>> >>
>> >> After doing "svn update", you will need to delete the directory
>> >> 'tools/maven2/maven-bundle-plugin'...
>> >>
>> >>> This will be part of the previous discussion that we had about
>> >>> reorganizing the svn repo to have all subprojects have their own
>> >>> top-level directory in the trunk, with related modules of the
>> >>> sub-project under the sub-project directory rather than in the
>> >>> trunk. I plan to start making this mods to the repo shortly.
>> >>
>> >> Just like the above, Karl and I have started to reorganize the
repo.
>> >> The eventadmin project was refactored and I will do iPOJO next.
Once
>> >> we get UPnP and MOSGi moved to the new approach, we should have a
>> >> manageable trunk directory! :-)
>> >>
>> >> -> richard
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> -> richard
>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> my 0.02
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 5/20/07, Karl Pauls <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>>>> Dear Felix Community,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> in order to follow-up on recent discussions - and our new
>> status as
>> a
>> >>>>> TLP - I'd like to get a roadmap towards a new release going.
>> Let me
>> >>>>> try to get a few thoughts across and see what the general
>> reactions
>> >>>>> are :-)
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Looking back at recent comments and events I believe it
would be
>> >>>>> beneficial to get a new (and first) official release out of the
>> door
>> >>>>> as soon as possible. That would make it more clear where we are
at
>> >>>>> the
>> >>>>> moment and give Felix users something to build trust upon.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Personally, I'd prefer to get a "core release" out quickly. I
know
>> >>>>> that a lot of the subprojects are eager to get something out
>> but we
>> >>>>> need to discuss how to handle those releases and I don't
want to
>> >>>>> delay
>> >>>>> the core release because of that.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> That said, taking the last release into account I guess, it
>> would be
>> >>>>> fairly easy to get the involved parts into shape and released
>> within
>> >>>>> the next month or two (namely, main, framework, plugin, shell,
>> >>>>> shell.tui, bundlerepository, and org.osgi.core).
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Richard tells me that he has still some stuff to commit to
>> clean-up
>> >>>>> the required bundle functionality, wants to address FELIX-203,
>> and I
>> >>>>> do have two small patches for the extension bundle stuff.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Other then that, we would need to remove the incubator
references,
>> >>>>> create proper NOTICE files, figure out a changelog, and tackle
>> a few
>> >>>>> questions namely,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 1) Should it be yet another tarball release or does somebody
>> >>>>> volunteer to
>> >>>>> get our installer up and running again?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 2) Is this going to be our 1.0 release?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> In regard to 2), I'm leaning towards a 1.0 release to emphasize
>> >>>>> our status as a
>> >>>>> graduated project and the fact that the core Felix
technology is
>> >>>>> stable
>> >>>>> and usable now. I do not think it is necessary to tie the 1.0
>> >>>>> release to
>> >>>>> complete spec compliance, since being below 1.0 generally has a
>> "not
>> >>>>> quite ready" stigma attached to it, which is not the case. Our
>> >>>>> goal is
>> >>>>> spec compliance and we will have to be clear in which areas we
are
>> >>>>> not
>> >>>>> yet compliant, but Felix is definitely far enough along to be
>> >>>>> considered
>> >>>>> stable and a 1.0 release. However, if there are strong feelings
to
>> >>>>> the
>> >>>>> contrary, my opinion could be changed.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> What do you all think?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> regards,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Karl
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> --
>> >>>>> Karl Pauls
>> >>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
