Another thing that migth be a big step, but much wanted from my perspective
is to implement servlet api 3.0. Especially for the cometd features.
Perhaps not M2 but it's a discussion I want to bring up.
/Ludwig
-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
From: Thomas Vandahl
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 9:37 PM
To: Turbine Developers List
Subject: [DISCUSS] What happens after M1?
M2 of course...
But seriously:
- What do we want to achieve until M2?
- When shall we schedule the M2 release?
My thoughts
- Replace the security service with the Fulcrum components
... and remove the old one. As the security components of Fulcrum are
not released yet: Anyone having a better idea?
- Think about the OSGi integration again.
A service provider is ready to be committed.
- Some annotation support for modules, tools and services
This would remove the need for the fixed package layout. But maybe this
is Turbines biggest advantage? WDYT?
- Dependency injection for modules
Just like the pull tools with different lifestyles. Services may be
simpler to use.
- More sophisticated caching for modules
Currently, modules need to be threadsafe for caching to work. This puts
a burden on developers, especially because caching is normally off
during development and you see the issues only in production.
- Maven staging
Like here: http://www.apache.org/dev/publishing-maven-artifacts.html
Anyone having experience?
- A common parent POM for Turbine Core and Fulcrum
Any other ideas, comments, criticism etc. are most welcome.
Bye, Thomas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@turbine.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@turbine.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@turbine.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@turbine.apache.org
