Hi Sumit - I'm sorry that I missed this email!
I am +1 on you as the release manager. I think that we should probably identify the driving features for 0.10.0 first and then follow up that discussion with whether or not we can make this a 1.0.0 but I believe that we would need to ensure two things: 1. package name clean up 2. API, programming model definition - once we go 1.0.0 we have different requirements for backward compatibility Are we happy with the ClientDSL model, with various base classes for providers, etc? In terms of features for 0.10.0 - I have a couple in mind: 1. Centralized LDAP configuration that can be used across multiple topologies 2. Integration of the hadoop group lookup pluging as an identity assertion extension (LDAP, unix, etc) 3. Group lookup API for KnoxSSO extension 4. Logout API for KnoxSSO 5. Service description pages - perhaps test pages Thoughts? --larry On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 1:19 PM, sumit gupta <[email protected]> wrote: > In light of the recent 0.9.1 planning discuss thread, I thought I > would take the opportunity to kick off a discussion about the next > release for Knox. > > The main discussion points I have so far for this release are: > > 1. Should this release be the 1.0.0 release for Knox? > 2. What are the main features that we would like to target for this > release? > > Once we decide on the scope of the release we can collectively come up > with a target release date. I would also be happy to volunteer as the > release manager for this release, if there is no objection. > > In relation to point number 1, I would be interested in seeking > opinion on what we would like to do in terms of package names or any > other changes to the structure of the source or build. I'm not sure if > there is a set of conventions or guidelines for an Apache project to > follow when releasing a 1.0.0, so any insight or advice there would > also be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks, > Sumit. >
