Re: [DISCUSS] Beyond 1.0.0
On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 2:49 PM Nick Couchman wrote: > > >> > So, I think we've probably had enough time to at least catch the biggest >> > bugs in 1.0.0 and get those into JIRA, and I think many of those have >> been >> > squashed. Are we good fixing 1.1.0 release at the following list of >> issues: >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/GUACAMOLE/versions/12343049 >> > >> > And moving forward with the release? By this list we have 17 issues >> > needing to be finished up prior to cutting the release. There are >> several >> > PRs waiting for reviews to be finished up - any of the committers who >> can >> > jump on and do reviews, your help would be greatly appreciated! >> > >> >> +1 >> >> > Any others that we think should get added to the next version? >> > >> >> I'd suggest also including: >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GUACAMOLE-696 - "Apply database >> groups if authenticated user matches database user" >> >> and: >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GUACAMOLE-715 - "Permission >> management based on LDAP groups not working as documented" >> >> Both of which are issues encountered with the new user group support >> following release of 1.0.0. The former is a point of confusion which >> has resulted in a few threads on the mailing list, while the latter is >> a legitimate bug in the way delegated authentication is handled by the >> database auth (it still assumes there will be a corresponding database >> user). >> > > Agreed - I've added both of these to 1.1.0 in JIRA. If anyone has any > objections, don't hesitate to speak up, but it would be good to adjust > behavior and/or fix these bugs so as to avoid further confusion. > > >> >> I'd also say let's add the FreeRDP 2.0.0 support to the scope, and try >> to buckle down and get it done. It's becoming increasingly critical, >> particularly for downstream Linux distributions that wish to drop >> support for older FreeRDP releases. I think I should be able to manage >> it within February: >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GUACAMOLE-249 > > > Okay, sounds good. I've also added this to the 1.1.0 release in JIRA. > This brings us to 56 total issues, with 17 remaining to complete. Several > of those are in progress and can be closed out as soon as code is reviewed > and merged. > > I've also tacked -694 on this one - it deals with a missing package that results in certificate verification failure in Docker. Relative small/easy to resolve. -Nick >
Re: [DISCUSS] Beyond 1.0.0
> > > > > So, I think we've probably had enough time to at least catch the biggest > > bugs in 1.0.0 and get those into JIRA, and I think many of those have > been > > squashed. Are we good fixing 1.1.0 release at the following list of > issues: > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/GUACAMOLE/versions/12343049 > > > > And moving forward with the release? By this list we have 17 issues > > needing to be finished up prior to cutting the release. There are > several > > PRs waiting for reviews to be finished up - any of the committers who can > > jump on and do reviews, your help would be greatly appreciated! > > > > +1 > > > Any others that we think should get added to the next version? > > > > I'd suggest also including: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GUACAMOLE-696 - "Apply database > groups if authenticated user matches database user" > > and: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GUACAMOLE-715 - "Permission > management based on LDAP groups not working as documented" > > Both of which are issues encountered with the new user group support > following release of 1.0.0. The former is a point of confusion which > has resulted in a few threads on the mailing list, while the latter is > a legitimate bug in the way delegated authentication is handled by the > database auth (it still assumes there will be a corresponding database > user). > Agreed - I've added both of these to 1.1.0 in JIRA. If anyone has any objections, don't hesitate to speak up, but it would be good to adjust behavior and/or fix these bugs so as to avoid further confusion. > > I'd also say let's add the FreeRDP 2.0.0 support to the scope, and try > to buckle down and get it done. It's becoming increasingly critical, > particularly for downstream Linux distributions that wish to drop > support for older FreeRDP releases. I think I should be able to manage > it within February: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GUACAMOLE-249 Okay, sounds good. I've also added this to the 1.1.0 release in JIRA. This brings us to 56 total issues, with 17 remaining to complete. Several of those are in progress and can be closed out as soon as code is reviewed and merged. -Nick
[GitHub] necouchman opened a new pull request #372: GUACAMOLE-354: Add ch-de-qwertz option for RDP keymap.
necouchman opened a new pull request #372: GUACAMOLE-354: Add ch-de-qwertz option for RDP keymap. URL: https://github.com/apache/guacamole-client/pull/372 Someone else did the hard work of generating the keymap, so I'll finish it up with the simple JSON modification. :smile: This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org With regards, Apache Git Services
[GitHub] necouchman merged pull request #320: GUACAMOLE-626: Add support for Docker secrets to startup.sh
necouchman merged pull request #320: GUACAMOLE-626: Add support for Docker secrets to startup.sh URL: https://github.com/apache/guacamole-client/pull/320 This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org With regards, Apache Git Services
[GitHub] necouchman opened a new pull request #108: GUACAMOLE-718: Correct slight grammatical error in TOTP chapter.
necouchman opened a new pull request #108: GUACAMOLE-718: Correct slight grammatical error in TOTP chapter. URL: https://github.com/apache/guacamole-manual/pull/108 Because we only should speak like that on Speak Like a Pirate Day. This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org With regards, Apache Git Services
Re: [DISCUSS] Beyond 1.0.0
On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 5:42 PM Nick Couchman wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 7:57 PM Nick Couchman wrote: > > > > >> I think the new versioning scheme still seems sensible, but following > >> 1.1.0 > >> I suggest we consider whether we should adopt a branching scheme like you > >> mentioned before. It would be nice to rely on being able to always produce > >> bugfix/minor releases without breaking compatibility. > > > > > > Agreed, and, until we do handle the branching scheme, we need to be > > looking really close at any commits we make to insure that we're not > > Introducing changes that will impact compatibility, or, if we do, that > > we're introducing the necessary changes to keep things > > backward-compatible. Just something for all committers to be aware of at > > this point. > > > > > >> > >> Our issues with producing a release following 1.0.0 are more with the > >> current existence of an incompatible change on master (and the upgrade > >> headache that implies for any users affected by bugs in 1.0.0), not with > >> the numbering. > > > > > > Sounds good. > > > > -Nick > > > > So, I think we've probably had enough time to at least catch the biggest > bugs in 1.0.0 and get those into JIRA, and I think many of those have been > squashed. Are we good fixing 1.1.0 release at the following list of issues: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/GUACAMOLE/versions/12343049 > > And moving forward with the release? By this list we have 17 issues > needing to be finished up prior to cutting the release. There are several > PRs waiting for reviews to be finished up - any of the committers who can > jump on and do reviews, your help would be greatly appreciated! > +1 > Any others that we think should get added to the next version? > I'd suggest also including: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GUACAMOLE-696 - "Apply database groups if authenticated user matches database user" and: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GUACAMOLE-715 - "Permission management based on LDAP groups not working as documented" Both of which are issues encountered with the new user group support following release of 1.0.0. The former is a point of confusion which has resulted in a few threads on the mailing list, while the latter is a legitimate bug in the way delegated authentication is handled by the database auth (it still assumes there will be a corresponding database user). I'd also say let's add the FreeRDP 2.0.0 support to the scope, and try to buckle down and get it done. It's becoming increasingly critical, particularly for downstream Linux distributions that wish to drop support for older FreeRDP releases. I think I should be able to manage it within February: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GUACAMOLE-249 - Mike
[GitHub] daniquir commented on issue #359: GUACAMOLE-617: Extract Permission Management from JDBC Authentication Module
daniquir commented on issue #359: GUACAMOLE-617: Extract Permission Management from JDBC Authentication Module URL: https://github.com/apache/guacamole-client/pull/359#issuecomment-459954841 I finished with the formatting of the code and restored the blocks of imports that were generated by the IDE Eclipse. The best solution for this has been to create a formatter for Eclipse with the style guidelines, I think this may be useful for other people and I would like to be able to share the formatter so they can use it. For now, with this I have finished reviewing everything you have mentioned before. I await your feedback to continue reviewing the code. This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org With regards, Apache Git Services
