Re: identify abandoned oak modules

2017-11-27 Thread Davide Giannella 
On 27/11/2017 11:42, Alex Deparvu wrote:
> Why wait for the branch? Most of these modules have not been updated in a
> while, why keep them around for another cycle?
> I would move them to attic *before* the branch.

It's just test coverage. If we do it after 1.8, we'll have a full year
of cuts from trunk to test if anything is missing. If we do it now,
we'll have only 3-4 loads.

However if the team feels confident enough, let's move them.

Davide

Re: identify abandoned oak modules

2017-11-27 Thread Alex Deparvu 
> I'd say we do that after the branching in time for 1.10. The 1.8
branching is planned on the 15th Jan

Why wait for the branch? Most of these modules have not been updated in a
while, why keep them around for another cycle?
I would move them to attic *before* the branch.


alex


On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:41 AM, Davide Giannella 
wrote:

> On 21/11/2017 14:56, Angela Schreiber wrote:
> > hi oak devs
> >
> > looking at the list of modules we have in oak/trunk i get the impression
> > that some are not actively worked on or maintained.
> > would it make sense or be possible to retire some of the modules that
> were
> > originally started for productive usage and have been abandoned in the
> > mean time?
> >
> >
>
> In favour of the action. Could you please create a jira issue where we
> can work with subtasks for each module?
>
> I'd say we do that after the branching in time for 1.10. The 1.8
> branching is planned on the 15th Jan
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/67a82162e8e2e86291d6c9b9e68d15
> c8bf70a5bae4016d76d941b37d@%3Coak-dev.jackrabbit.apache.org%3E
>
> D.
>
>
>

Re: identify abandoned oak modules

2017-11-23 Thread Davide Giannella 
On 21/11/2017 14:56, Angela Schreiber wrote:
> hi oak devs
>
> looking at the list of modules we have in oak/trunk i get the impression
> that some are not actively worked on or maintained.
> would it make sense or be possible to retire some of the modules that were
> originally started for productive usage and have been abandoned in the
> mean time?
>
>

In favour of the action. Could you please create a jira issue where we
can work with subtasks for each module?

I'd say we do that after the branching in time for 1.10. The 1.8
branching is planned on the 15th Jan

https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/67a82162e8e2e86291d6c9b9e68d15c8bf70a5bae4016d76d941b37d@%3Coak-dev.jackrabbit.apache.org%3E

D.

Re: identify abandoned oak modules

2017-11-21 Thread Bertrand Delacretaz 
Hi,

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 4:58 PM, Michael Dürig  wrote:
> ...Not exactly retiring but what about moving...

FWIW, in Sling we are using an "attic" folder for such retired
modules, see http://sling.apache.org/project-information.html#attic

-Bertrand

Re: identify abandoned oak modules

2017-11-21 Thread Michael Dürig 


Not exactly retiring but what about moving oak-pojosr under oak-examples?

Michael

On 21.11.17 16:53, Alex Deparvu wrote:

I think we can also add 'oak-http' to the list.

alex

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 4:04 PM, Francesco Mari 
wrote:


I'm in favour of retiring oak-remote. It is not currently used and it
didn't receive much attention in the recent past.

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Angela Schreiber
 wrote:

hi oak devs

looking at the list of modules we have in oak/trunk i get the impression
that some are not actively worked on or maintained.
would it make sense or be possible to retire some of the modules that

were

originally started for productive usage and have been abandoned in the
mean time?

kind regards
angela

Re: identify abandoned oak modules

2017-11-21 Thread Alex Deparvu 
I think we can also add 'oak-http' to the list.

alex

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 4:04 PM, Francesco Mari 
wrote:

> I'm in favour of retiring oak-remote. It is not currently used and it
> didn't receive much attention in the recent past.
>
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Angela Schreiber
>  wrote:
> > hi oak devs
> >
> > looking at the list of modules we have in oak/trunk i get the impression
> > that some are not actively worked on or maintained.
> > would it make sense or be possible to retire some of the modules that
> were
> > originally started for productive usage and have been abandoned in the
> > mean time?
> >
> > kind regards
> > angela
> >
>

Re: identify abandoned oak modules

2017-11-21 Thread Francesco Mari 
I'm in favour of retiring oak-remote. It is not currently used and it
didn't receive much attention in the recent past.

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Angela Schreiber
 wrote:
> hi oak devs
>
> looking at the list of modules we have in oak/trunk i get the impression
> that some are not actively worked on or maintained.
> would it make sense or be possible to retire some of the modules that were
> originally started for productive usage and have been abandoned in the
> mean time?
>
> kind regards
> angela
>