>From past experience, broad discussions might get us to meta-discussions. I'd prefer to define incremental scenarios and making them supported in incremental milestones, where scope would increase gradativelly giving us an opportunity to solidifying the domain story in a broad perspective. I anticipate at least couple milestones to get all the domain scenarios supported.
Well, but this is just what I had in mind... and might not be what others are thinking... so I'm open to discussions and it would be great to start identifying scenarios so that everybody be on the same page and to help us have a feeling about the amount of work that will be required. Thoughts ? On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 10:57 AM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 6:49 PM, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> >> I'm a little worried that we would try to attack multiple issues and >> don't give the necessary attention to the core in this first milestone >> release. I was considering ws binding already somewhat a stretch, and >> maybe we should even revisit that. I think another option would be to >> get milestones releases much more frequent then usual, and agree on a >> roadmap where we would incrementally address these other areas ? >> >> BTW, for a release time frame idea, I was thinking on starting >> preparing this release very early in January. >> >> Thoughts ? >> >> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 10:41 AM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 4:18 PM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 6:01 PM, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> +1 to have a milestone release for 2.0 (such as 2.0M1) in January. I >> >>> envision the following features to be supported: >> >>> >> >>> 1) OSGi-enabled core >> >>> 2) implementation.java >> >>> 3) binding.ws >> >>> 4) A simple/consitent SCA domain story >> >>> 5) samples and itests working with both JSE and Equinox >> >>> >> >> >> >> I'd like to include the webapp runtime here as well. >> >> >> >> ...ant >> >> >> >> >> > I think we should look at webapp now also. It's been an awkward >> > bedfellow of >> > the domain for a while and I'd like to know how we think that it should >> > work. It maybe that we don't think simple webapps should take part in >> > the >> > domain but it would be good to air the issue. >> > >> > Simon >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Luciano Resende >> Apache Tuscany, Apache PhotArk >> http://people.apache.org/~lresende >> http://lresende.blogspot.com/ > > I agree that things will be a stretch to get into the various milestones so > we either adjust the milestones or slip things out. We need to use our > judgement and be flexible. Given the job of getting a good story in the > domain we need to at least discuss how we think webapp should work. Then we > can decide whether the implementation is ready for the first release or > whether it slips into a later release. I'm all for the increments and for > some things we need to think ahead a little. > > Simon > -- Luciano Resende Apache Tuscany, Apache PhotArk http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://lresende.blogspot.com/
