Previous versions dtds

We have following dtds in geode source code. We were thinking to remove previous versions(1.0 to 6.6) of dtds.Please let us know if there is any concern on  this. ./main/resources/org/apache/geode/admin/doc-files/ds4_0.dtd ./main/resources/org/apache/geode/admin/doc-files/ds5_0.dtd

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Donation of Geode documentation

Great news! On Thursday, September 29, 2016, Anthony Baker wrote: > I am pleased to announce the donation of Geode documentation to the > Geode community. > > The documentation provides a complete user guide for Geode. This > donation includes the source necessary to build

[ANNOUNCE] Donation of Geode documentation

I am pleased to announce the donation of Geode documentation to the Geode community. The documentation provides a complete user guide for Geode. This donation includes the source necessary to build the documentation site currently hosted by Pivotal [1]. The documentation source has been converted

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Donation of Geode documentation

Thanks for the good news! On Sep 29, 2016 8:52 PM, "Kirk Lund" wrote: > Great news! > > On Thursday, September 29, 2016, Anthony Baker wrote: > > > I am pleased to announce the donation of Geode documentation to the > > Geode community. > > > > The

Re: [VIDEO] Replay of Geode Clubhouse - Domain Driven Design & Reactive Programming w/ Apache Geode - Discussion Panel

Thanks again to Vaughn Vernon and Wes Williams for talking with the Geode Community. Here is the replay of our discussion on Youtube , and a link to download the video for your offline viewing pleasure

GEODE-1949 - Adding auto-balancer and spring-expression to geode-dependencies.jar

Hi, The geode-rebalancer jar is not currently shipped with the geode binary. I think we should include as part of the binary distribution, and also include it in geode-dependencies.jar so that it is on the classpath for the server. This won't require us to include any new dependencies in the lib

Set the group on review requests

I was trying to trace the history of a git commit and realized something: if the group on a review request is not set to ‘geode’ the review information is not communicated to the dev list. This is really important because: a) a change is being proposed and all are invited to participate in

Review Request 52398: GEODE-1949: Remove the dependency on quartz from the rebalancer

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/52398/ --- Review request for geode, nabarun nag and xiaojian zhou. Repository: geode

Re: Previous versions dtds

Yep, thanks for clarifying. Anthony > On Sep 29, 2016, at 2:33 PM, Jacob Barrett wrote: > > The files MUST remain in the source otherwise the validating parser will > have to download them from the website. This is VERY slow and only works if > you have Internet access.

Re: Previous versions dtds

+1 for dropping the dtd up to 6.6. -1 for dropping 7.0/8.0, 8.1 xsd. I think we should keep those for another release or two to make it easier for people upgrading. Is anyone actually using createTypesFromXml? If not, I would suggest deprecating it. -Dan On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Jacob

Re: Limiting scope for Geode 1.0

I think we should propose creating that release branch sooner (now?) so we can minimize unplanned changes slipping into 1.0 and destabilizing it. -Kirk On Thursday, September 29, 2016, Anthony Baker wrote: > Using the gitflow approach, we cut a release/1.0.0 branch to

Re: Previous versions dtds

Any active dtd's or schema’s should be hosted near to http://geode.apache.org/schema/cache/. If you follow the directions [1] to update the website it’s not too hard. Can we remove the pivotal.io schema from source?

Re: Previous versions dtds

+1 We also unit tests for these: CacheXml30DUnitTest CacheXml40DUnitTest ... and so on. we should bring all the test cases within these to CacheXml70DUnitTest On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 9:37 AM, Hitesh Khamesra < hitesh...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote: > We have following dtds in geode source code. We

Limiting scope for Geode 1.0

What changes are we still waiting on to cut the next RC of Geode 1.0? Is there a way to create a branch for Geode 1.0 develop that allows folks to continue working on post-1.0 features or bug fixes without destabilizing Geode 1.0? This way, only the necessary changes for Geode 1.0 would go to the

Re: GEODE-1949 - Adding auto-balancer and spring-expression to geode-dependencies.jar

Looks like we’ve been including geode-rebalancer with the official source release, just not the binary convenience artifacts. +1 Anthony > On Sep 29, 2016, at 11:17 AM, Dan Smith wrote: > > Hi, > > The geode-rebalancer jar is not currently shipped with the geode binary.

Re: From Incubation to TLP

On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 3:33 AM, Anthony Baker wrote: > Hi Niall! > > Thanks for your really helpful input. I agree that development of an > active, stable, and diverse community that understands and practices the > Apache Way is a primary indicator of readiness for

Review Request 52410: GEODE-1949: Adding geode-rebalancer to the binary distribution

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/52410/ --- Review request for geode, Anthony Baker and Jason Huynh. Repository: geode

Podling Report Reminder - October 2016

Dear podling, This email was sent by an automated system on behalf of the Apache Incubator PMC. It is an initial reminder to give you plenty of time to prepare your quarterly board report. The board meeting is scheduled for Wed, 19 October 2016, 10:30 am PDT. The report for your podling will

Re: Review Request 52410: GEODE-1949: Adding geode-rebalancer to the binary distribution

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/52410/#review150975 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Anthony Baker On Sept. 29, 2016, 10:56

Re: Previous versions dtds

I'm actually unfamiliar with statisticsType.dtd: geode-core/src/main/resources/org/apache/geode/statisticsType.dtd I notice it still references GemStone and gemstone.com. Do we have copies of the dtds on geode.apache.org? Where should these dtds live online? Thanks, Kirk On Thu, Sep 29, 2016

Re: Previous versions dtds

I think you should drop all the GemFire DTDs from Geode. Geode doesn't need to be tainted with reading old GemFire configuration files. It is very simple for someone to update their XML to the Geode XSD. On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 2:15 PM Darrel Schneider wrote: >

Re: Limiting scope for Geode 1.0

Using the gitflow approach, we cut a release/1.0.0 branch to isolate the release branch from ongoing development. For past releases we have waited as long as possible to cut the branch to minimize overhead. Perhaps this time we should create the branch earlier. JIRA shows the open issues for

Re: Limiting scope for Geode 1.0

+1 for creating branch now to prevent feature creep. On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 2:10 PM Kirk Lund wrote: > I think we should propose creating that release branch sooner (now?) so we > can minimize unplanned changes slipping into 1.0 and destabilizing it. > > -Kirk > > On

Re: Previous versions dtds

The files MUST remain in the source otherwise the validating parser will have to download them from the website. This is VERY slow and only works if you have Internet access. The schema resolver first looks in the class path then to the web. -Jake On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 2:24 PM Anthony Baker