Just one more point on a 1.0.0 release. The code base could really benefit
from a quick scan of all "catch" clauses to see what we are doing with
exceptions. For example, the server TokenPreAuth contains the following:
} catch (FileNotFoundException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
} catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
We should either be logging exceptions properly or propagating them
accordingly.
Colm.
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 2:01 PM, Colm O hEigeartaigh <cohei...@apache.org>
wrote:
> +1 for a release. However, I believe there to be a security issue with
> anonymous pkinit as per my recent mail, so I'd like this to be addressed in
> the release first.
>
> Colm.
>
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny <elecha...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Le 27/07/16 à 10:54, Zheng, Kai a écrit :
>> > Maybe we could release this version as 1.0.0 directly? Any concern? I
>> don't see any. We could claim the authorization feature and remote kadmin
>> support as [EXPERIMENTAL].
>> >
>> > Sorry too busy recently and don't have bandwidth on this. Hope it can
>> move forward anyway.
>>
>> That's really up to you ! If there were no complain with the latest RC,
>> then, yes, delivering a 1.0 would totally make sense.
>>
>> FTR, in the past, we had a convoluted versionning pattern at Directory
>> for projects, with numerous milestones. This was plain stupid. I really
>> like the way Chrome and Firefox are released those days, with a quick
>> incremental version : each new features added deserve a separate
>> version, with some potential minor versions for urgent bug fixes.
>>
>> But this is something you have to discuss, my friends ;-)
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Colm O hEigeartaigh
>
> Talend Community Coder
> http://coders.talend.com
>
--
Colm O hEigeartaigh
Talend Community Coder
http://coders.talend.com
