Re: Questions about the Reference Collection dependencies. Was: Re: Release 3.0

Ah. I can see how some might quibble about this. I do see the Apache license in the pom there. How about if we agree on a target namespace for the package, ask Peter to check in the files (pom, sources, test-sources) to that namespace, and then it will be easy enough to reorganize the files into

Re: Questions about the Reference Collection dependencies. Was: Re: Release 3.0

Is the branch that Dennis worked on in CI yet? I am looking at [1] and I do not see it called out explicitly. In fact, it looks like the full CI is only running against the trunk. If that is true, can we put Dennis's branch into CI? And it looks like CI has several pieces. I assume they all

Re: IPv6 Multicast Address Registration completed

Thanks! On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Bryan Thompson wrote: > Excellent. > > Bryan > On Aug 30, 2015 6:31 AM, "Peter Firmstone" > wrote: > > > Our existing IPv4 Multicast Addresses: > > > > 224.0.1.84 jini-announcement > > 224.0.1.85

Re: River Musings

While I do think that the org.apache.river.(impl|api) distinction is more clear, different projects have different styles in this regard and I think it is Ok to respect the existing patterns. My sense is that river 3.0 is not introducing a large set of new public implementation objects and that

Re: River Musings

On 8/31/2015 4:07 PM, Bryan Thompson wrote: ... Why use net.jini.* rather than net.river.*? Do mean "net.river" rather than "org.apache.river"? We have domain names jini.net and river.apache.org, and can base package names on either of those. If we want to use anything else, we would need

Re: Questions about the Reference Collection dependencies. Was: Re: Release 3.0

I'd appreciate it Bryan, use the version in the qa_suite, the version on Sourceforge is older. http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/river/jtsk/skunk/qa_refactor/trunk/dep-libs/rc-libs/ Thanks, Peter. On 30/08/2015 9:54 PM, Bryan Thompson wrote: Peter, would you be open to having someone else

Re: River Musings

On 30/08/2015 9:50 PM, Bryan Thompson wrote: Peter, I like the solution. I have two questions. One related to the radmap. The other related to river and IoT. First, this a 3.1 release road map issue? Yes. It would be nice to be able to move to a 3.0 now and have a development road map

Re: River Musings

All packages in org.apache.river.*, apart from org.apache.river.api is implementation code. There's also an implementation package org.apache.river.impl. I think it would be too much work to move everything into the impl package now. The easiest solution would be to move anything in

Re: River Musings

On 8/31/2015 4:07 PM, Bryan Thompson wrote: ... Apologies if I am behind the curve here. It would probably be easier for me to understand if the package namespace cleanup was proposed as a list of X => Y renames so I could look at the source tree and understand more clearly what is involved.

Re: Questions about the Reference Collection dependencies. Was: Re: Release 3.0

Although Peter has indicated approval, from a licensing point of view it might be best if he were the one to check it in. On 8/31/2015 6:11 AM, Bryan Thompson wrote: Fine by me. I am pretty sure Peter already indicated approval for this. I was just offering to help remove a potential

Re: Questions about the Reference Collection dependencies. Was: Re: Release 3.0

If Peter is OK with it, it’s simpler for the project if the code gets integrated into River. At some point I saw an ‘org.apache.river.collections’ package, which I thought was the custard-apple thing. If there’s a strong need for the artifact to be published on its own, it could also be done

Re: Questions about the Reference Collection dependencies. Was: Re: Release 3.0

I am pretty sure Peter also indicated that the code is in fact checked in to apache river right now - part of the qa branch as I recall. Thus it is already contributed by Peter. Right? I believe that all that is required is a package rename into org.apache.river Can someone please confirm

Re: River Musings

Ok. Given this approach, it sounds like reaching out to the IoT community would be a good step. Identify some of the more popular device protocols, coordinate with the communities for those devices/protocols, introduce discovery for those devices/protocols in river, and do some outreach in those

Re: Questions about the Reference Collection dependencies. Was: Re: Release 3.0

Fine by me. I am pretty sure Peter already indicated approval for this. I was just offering to help remove a potential blocker for the release. +1 for publishing apple custard as a river artifact. Bryan Bryan Thompson Chief Scientist & Founder SYSTAP, LLC 4501 Tower Road Greensboro, NC

Re: Questions about the Reference Collection dependencies. Was: Re: Release 3.0

Yes and no. He put the sources in a jar file inside the deps-lib/rc-libs folder in the qa-refactor branch. Branch is at: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/river/jtsk/skunk/qa_refactor/trunk/ or Dennis’s namespace