FYI - I am beginning the process to create a release candidate and will be
creating an 0.8.0 branch shortly.


On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 6:53 AM, Jérôme LELEU <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> KNOX-655 is the last remaining point for pac4j: I just uploaded a patch to
> be on time for release schedule.
>
> Thanks.
> Best regards,
> Jérôme
>
>
> 2016-01-22 20:48 GMT+01:00 larry mccay <[email protected]>:
>
> > All -
> >
> > We are a week from our target date for the 0.8.0 release.
> >
> > I am looking at unresolved issues with a Fix version of 0.8.0 and it
> seems
> > that we have 20+ outstanding issues. Some of these may be fixed and just
> > not resolved but a good many of them will likely need to be moved out.
> See
> > the following filter:
> >
> >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KNOX-255?jql=project%20%3D%20KNOX%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%200.8.0%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC
> >
> > The 0.8.0 focus has been agreed on to be a set of driving usecases around
> > the use of external authentication mechanisms utilizing the pac4j
> provider
> > that enables:
> >
> > 1. existing KnoxSSO aware application integrations to use the new
> > authentication capabilities
> > 2. enable development of participating applications that consume Hadoop
> > resources through Knox using the SSOCookieProvider and CORS.
> >
> > There are a few other patches that would be great to get into 0.8.0 as
> they
> > would complement that focus such as the PAM authentication capabilities.
> In
> > order to get them in we will need to close down on outstanding issues -
> > such as docs.
> >
> > I plan to make a pass through this filter and move some out to "future",
> > ask for input for inclusion and try and resolve any that are already
> fixed.
> >
> > Next week I will make another pass and prune any that still are
> > outstanding. So that we are clear for release on 1/29.
> >
> > If anyone feels that some other JIRA or patch needs to be done in 0.8.0
> > please give a shout and we can move it for inclusion.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --larry
> >
>

Reply via email to