Tim,

+1 to making restructuring master to 2.x shape. If we can at least migrate
modularization patches, dependency changes and move to java 8 it certainly
will be a good step forward and big reduction of technical debt.

On пн, 28 авг. 2017, 16:52 Bob Paulin <[email protected]> wrote:

> Tim,
>
> +1 You've done an admirable job of dual maintenance but it sounds like
> it became a heavy tax on development.  Releasing would allow us to get
> back to "trunk" based development again.  Then we could focus on porting
> any missed patches and start looking for any regressions.  I also like
> the idea of picking up Java 8 as many other projects are starting to do
> this.
>
> - Bob
>
>
>
> On 8/28/2017 8:32 AM, Allison, Timothy B. wrote:
> > All,
> >
> >   We're getting some increasing deltas btwn the 2.0 and trunk branches.
> Many of these are my fault; I gave up making updates to 2.0 around
> April/May, I think.
> >
> >   What would people think of punting on some of the desired goals of 2.0
> (e.g. chaining parsers, more structured but still simple metadata) and
> releasing 2.0 soonish...say 2.0-BETA end of September?
> >
> >   We've been able to make some major improvements to Tika without
> breaking backwards compatibility.  We _might_ be able to do that with the
> outstanding issues for 2.0 when someone has time.
> >
> >   We could also do the upgrade to jdk 8 with Tika 2.0.
> >
> >   If this sounds reasonable, I propose creating a 1.x branch from trunk
> for 1.x maintenance and then reworking trunk to the 2.x structure that Bob
> Paulin so elegantly worked out.  I figure we can either copy/paste from
> trunk to the current 2.x (and _hope_ we get all the updates) or use Bob's
> 2.0 as a model for restructuring trunk.  At this point, I'd prefer the
> second option.  The key here is to switch "trunk" to 2.0 so that we all
> have the mindset that 2.0 is what we're focused on.
> >
> >    The main benefit of this proposal is that we'd have a more modular
> Tika soon.
> >
> >    What do you think?
> >
> >          Best,
> >
> >                Tim
> >
>
>
> --

Best regards,
Konstantin Gribov

Reply via email to