Since 1.8.0 is out, we can now think about what we can do for upcoming
releases.
If I may start making suggestions:
1.8.x:
- bugfixes (also when related to performance only)
- loose ends on datatypes (XML presentation and javascript,
commons-validator wrapper, LIST db type?)
- loose ends on applications and contributions.
1.9.0
- dropping support for java 1.4, dropping backport-concurrent,
using other java 1.5 features in the code. Evaluate what we must do
with things like 'NodeList' (should it not become List<Node>?)
- 1.8 has made a start with a new org.mmbase.core package
We must discuss how we progress with this. CoreField suggest that
also CoreNode, CoreNodeManager may follow. We may introduce these
in 1.9 already.
- Changes necessary for the upcoming application/portlet
framework. E.g. to accomodate versioning, workflow and
application-packaging features more easily.
- 1.8.0 is shipped with succeeding junit test-cases.
1.9 must be shipped with standardized bench-marks for performance of
core, bridge, taglib etc. I feel it is a problem that must be
addressed that we don't well perceive performance regressions or
improvements.
Something like that seems to be enough for a new major release. It
should not take over 2 years again. I'd say we must strive to a release
of 1.9 in 2006.
And after that:
2.0 (yeah! core2, finally!, after so many years ...)
- Completing of the 'code clean up' (optimization project)
- Dropping MMObjectBuilder MMObjectNode, in favour of more bridge
like interfaces all around (as we may have anticipated in 1.9 by
filling org.mmbase.core..).
- ....
- ...
Please, comment and contribute.
Greetings,
Michiel
--
Michiel Meeuwissen mihxil'
Peperbus 111 MediaPark H'sum [] ()
+31 (0)35 6772979 nl_NL eo_XX en_US
_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.mmbase.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
