+1 from me.
On 5/23/06, Matt Hogstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1000
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> How about we fix the actual show stoppers (only some of these blockers
> are show stoppers) and ship what we got? Then we just do a dot release
> every few weeks as any additional things are fixed. I think having more
> regular (short) releases will be positive for the community and will
> help to reduce our tendency to polish. I know we all want to put out
> the best software but there is a point at which this desire starts to
> hurt us.
>
> -dain
>
> On May 23, 2006, at 9:33 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> Here is what I would like to define as our closing set for 1.1
>>
>> * Restoration of Codehaus repos to get OEJB and TranQL up and running.
>> * Complete testing of current performance fixes and commit them.
>> * Close out SNAPSHOTs to final releases (depends partially on the above)
>> * Complete the following JIRAs
>>
>> Key Priority Summary
>> GERONIMO-1492 Blocker Many "org/apache/geronimo" configIds still
>> live in source tree
>> GERONIMO-1849 Blocker Attribute Manager broken WRT Reference
>> GERONIMO-1860 Blocker Tests of optional ConfigID components
>> GERONIMO-1924 Blocker Need to register the tomcat jndi url
>> handler somehow
>> GERONIMO-1960 Blocker Bad GBean reference isn't caught during
>> deployment
>> GERONIMO-2006 Blocker Deploying an application with an incorrect
>> deployment plan results in non-functional admin console panel
>> GERONIMO-2038 Blocker assemblies\minimal-tomcat-server fails on
>> windows due to file path length
>> GERONIMO-2042 Blocker ConfigurationAwareReference needs Serial
>> Version UID
>> GERONIMO-2049 Blocker Jetty HTTPS edit shows no keystores in list
>> GERONIMO-2050 Blocker Unlocking a trust store still prompts for
>> private key selection/password
>> GERONIMO-2051 Blocker Console Jetty HTTPS connector has wrong
>> trust store help text
>> GERONIMO-2052 Blocker Dynamically added keystores never appear
>> as unlocked
>>
>> * Ship Unstable build
>>
>> * Run CTS Testing
>>
>> * Let bake a few days for testing
>>
>> * Release 1.1
>>
>> This is how I'd like to finish this release. Many of the above
>> defects are assigned to Aaron. Aaron, if you can keep the ones you
>> think you can handle over the next few days and unassign the rest.
>> Everyone else can grab a JIRA or two and get them fixed and closed
>> aggressively we can get this completed.
>>
>> Our original target for this release was April 28 and we're about a
>> month behind. I would very much like to ship this by next Wednesday
>> (May 31) but perhaps Friday is more realistic.
>>
>> If you have some cycles all help is appreciated.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Matt
>>
>> Aaron Mulder wrote:
>>> OK. I'm well aware that I've assigned a large number of 1.1 issues to
>>> myself. Is there someone else I should assign them to? And do you
>>> have a list of the "other issues" that you feel need to be addressed
>>> for the 1.1 release?
>>> Thanks,
>>> Aaron
>>> On 5/23/06, Matt Hogstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> I appreciate your concerns but as you noted there are a number of
>>>> other bug fixes and blockers that
>>>> *you* moved into the 1.1 stream that need to be addressed. Null
>>>> pointer exceptions, etc. If we
>>>> were in better shape on the usability front I would agree with you.
>>>> There are so many of those I
>>>> think focusing on fixing what we know is broken is the priority.
>>>>
>>>> -1 on new features unless the other issues are addressed. I've been
>>>> overly flexible on the release
>>>> so far. The release is going out this week or next.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your concern for the plugins but as release manager that
>>>> is not my priority. A stable
>>>> working release is.
>>>>
>>>> Matt
>>>>
>>>> Aaron Mulder wrote:
>>>> > I don't agree. 1.1 is not yet out the door, and if anything, it
>>>> looks
>>>> > like 1.2 will take longer than anticipated. Minor changes,
>>>> necessary,
>>>> > I vote 1.1. Remember, this change takes pressure off since we'll be
>>>> > able to release more features as plugins. I'm strongly in favor of
>>>> > taking things out of the critical path, whereas deferring to 1.2 will
>>>> > extend the critical path by another 3+ months.
>>>> >
>>>> > Thanks,
>>>> > Aaron
>>>> >
>>>> > On 5/22/06, Matt Hogstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> >> I agree that they are necessary. Let's put them in 1.2. 1.1 is
>>>> >> almost out the door and adding new
>>>> >> features at this point is very late in the game. We're currently 30
>>>> >> days past our original date and
>>>> >> almost 5 months past the 1.0 release.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Please defer these till 1.2.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Matt
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Aaron Mulder wrote:
>>>> >> > We can call them what we want, but I think all the features are
>>>> >> > necessary, in particular in order to support plugins. The
>>>> advantage
>>>> >> > of adding the first two features is that they let us take a lot of
>>>> >> > other features *out* of the critical path, and release them as
>>>> plugins
>>>> >> > (also letting us support non-ASL licensed providers).
>>>> Basically, the
>>>> >> > idea is to replace a properties file with a GBean, since you can't
>>>> >> > effectively add to a properties file at plugin installation
>>>> time, but
>>>> >> > you can certainly add GBeans. Bottom line, it's a small impact
>>>> change
>>>> >> > (console only, change the lookup logic that's already
>>>> encapsulated in
>>>> >> > a helper class to do a GBean interface query instead of a
>>>> properties
>>>> >> > file load), and it has significant benefits (new JMS providers or
>>>> >> > security providers can be added at runtime via plugins and do
>>>> not need
>>>> >> > to be hardcoded into the Geronimo distribution).
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > Thanks,
>>>> >> > Aaron
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > On 5/22/06, Matt Hogstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> >> >> Based on the list below I think 1,2 and 3 are new function and
>>>> 4 is a
>>>> >> >> bug fix.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Aaron Mulder wrote:
>>>> >> >> > Here are the things that I still want to squeeze into 1.1:
>>>> >> >> > - fix console JMS to accept new providers at runtime
>>>> >> >> > - fix console security realms to accept new providers at
>>>> runtime
>>>> >> >> > - add a missing Geronimo security provider to console security
>>>> >> realms
>>>> >> >> > - fix hot deploy dir so it notices files updated while the
>>>> server
>>>> >> was
>>>> >> >> > down and deletes files if they are undeployed some other way
>>>> >> >> >
>>>> >> >> > There are also AFAIK a number of not-yet-applied patches to
>>>> review.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Yes, there are several.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> I'm testing some performance related code. I'm waiting and
>>>> hoping
>>>> >> >> Codehaus comes up soon :)
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> >
>>>> >> >> > Thanks,
>>>> >> >> > Aaron
>>>> >> >> >
>>>> >> >> >
>>>> >> >> >
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>
>
>
>
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
