On Sep 9, 2005, at 2:39 AM, David Jencks wrote:
I think we've made significant progress in the last week towards
being ready to make the branch for M5, but I think there may be
reasons to wait a couple more days. There are 2 features that
people want to get in (security improvements and DDL generation)
that I would like to see in M5, and more stabilization is needed in
any case before the release. I think that unless someone is
waiting to get a new feature in that shouldn't go in M5 we should
wait until monday and see where we are.
If anyone is contemplating a commit that may destabilize our code
please speak up so we can branch beforehand.
Along with your list in the initial thread, we need to deal with the
BouncyCastle situation, since we need to stop shipping this jar. The
status quo is unacceptable because of the patent encumbrance of IDEA
and therefore the liability that could be accidentally triggered.
Rick has done some great work on hunting this down. (http://
issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-880) I think the fix is easy
on our side - we can just change the keystore portlet to detect BC
and do something different if not there (like show a page telling
user where to get it if they want it, etc...) but right now, we need
OpenEJB to remove the dependency. For OpenEJB, I think there are two
aspects - the inclusion of IDEA in the SSLCipherSuite list (modules/
core/src/java/org/openejb/corba/sunorb/SSLCipherSuiteDatabase.java)
and it's usage of the ASN1 codec. I don't know what they (OpenEJB)
want to do there - it's been suggested that the necessary code can be
copied (it's under a modified X.Net-ish license) or Directory could
be enhanced and used. It seems the former is simpler.
Ideas? (No pun intended...)
geir
thanks
david jencks
On Sep 6, 2005, at 9:33 PM, Jeff Genender wrote:
Ok ...I am hijacking this thread... enough discussion...lets vote
on it...
[ ] Friday 9/9 is the QA Cut date
[ ] I think it should be after Friday...and should be on ______
For me:
[X] Friday 9/9 is the QA Cut date
David Blevins wrote:
On Sep 6, 2005, at 6:50 PM, Jeff Genender wrote:
Aaron Mulder wrote:
What is the point of the "frozen list"? At this point, it
doesn't appear to have stopped development of things that
aren't on the list.
The list for what we are agreeing to go into M5. If something
isn't on the list and its an added bonus, then fine. We need a
closure date at this point. I think we have all agreed what is
minimally in the cut.
Maybe we should make the branch like Friday, so any code
not on
the list has to go into HEAD, and just have a longer closing
period to
resolve the list items. There is a lot on the list, so that
would mean a
lot of merges to HEAD, but unless everyone is willing to hold
off on
non-list items, I'm not sure we're actually moving toward
greater stability in the mean time.
Ok..shall we branch on Friday? Anhyone have any issues with
this? I am game.
Friday is great. Aaron expressed the same concern I was
thinking about; getting further and further from stable the long
we wait to branch. Things always tend to creep in.
+1
David
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
