well... i'm going to prepare my build-script... ;-)
Am 14.04.2016 um 17:03 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik:
First build is available here [1] :)
[1]
https://builds.apache.org/view/M-R/view/OpenMeetings/job/Openmeetings%203.2.x/
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <[email protected]>
wrote:
I agree, will create new branch
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Peter Dähn <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Maxim,
I would prefer option 2.
It will be a bit more effort, but I think there are more advantages.
1.
3.1.x will be clear and it need to be like that, if we talk about
critical issues that might be discovered somehow.
2.
We also need to take code-signing in account. I suggest to release a new
version as soon as it is possible to sign the code again. And there is no
forecast when it is possible.
And over all, I have no idea how long it takes, to rebuild the rooms.
Probably we get a few ideas from the community what could be implemented
and how. Maybe it is a good idea to ask in the user-list for ideas and
requests, with the goal that this work need to be done just one time...
Greetings Peter
Am 14.04.2016 um 08:07 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik:
I would like to continue discussion and get your opinion on how "HTML5
features" should be added to the room.
I see 3 options
1) development is performed in 3.1.x branch
Pros:
- we don't need to maintain additional branch
- dev versions to test can be taken from usual location
- we will "burn the bridge" and next release will contain updated
room
Cons:
- 3.1.x will be unusable for some period of time
- some well tested features might be broken during merge
2) additional 3.2.x branch is created
Pros:
- 3.1.x branch will stay clear and we can release some patch versions
Cons:
- we have to maintain 3 branches
3) development is performed in trunk
Pros:
- no new branches
Cons:
- "OpenLaszlo free" branch is no more "OpenLaszlo free" :(
I personally prefer option 1) above, but option 2) might also be OK due
to
our last 2 releases were not properly signed and we might need to release
3.1.2 without new room ....
WDYT?
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Peter Dähn <[email protected]> wrote:
ok.. I will try to get a few people here to help me... ;-)
Am 12.04.2016 um 07:26 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik:
Thanks for the response Peter :)
will start adding HTML5 features to the room :)
will send requests for testing :)
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Peter Dähn <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Maxim,
no help with the list from my site.. It is working I think ;-)
2nd part..
I wouldn't say ugly... it is more like "no surprises"... Like using
java-applications... you know the colors, button style etc... and more
html5 would be one more step to get ride of flash... I would
appreciate
that...
Greetings Peter
Am 07.04.2016 um 20:11 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik:
Hello All,
I currently using this list [1] as the list of features for 3.1.2,
maybe
it
is not perfect and you know how to make it better? :)))
Additionally today I heard "OM room is ugly" :( I can add more HTML5
elements to the room (WebSockets semms to work as expected)
WDYT?
[1]
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENMEETINGS-853?jql=project%20%3D%20OPENMEETINGS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%203.1.2%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20DESC%2C%20priority%20DESC
--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax
