Ok, I have no problem with that, what ever is the normal way of doing
things.
Ian
On 18 Nov 2008, at 18:48, Adam Winer wrote:
When I've branched Apache Subversion projects, I haven't used a branch
manager. Whoever checks in a transaction that needs to go to the
branch can take on merging to the branch as well.
IMO, a branch is exactly the right thing, and there's no particular
reason to wait. They're cheap, fast, and merging in transactions is
easy. Tags should be created off branches, not the trunk.
If nothing else, this lets us more aggressively check in 0.9 work that
might be destabilizing.
-- Adam
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Ian Boston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just a thought,
could we do an RC1, RC2 and final, as a tag, rather than branch,
then we
wont have to find a branch manager to manage the branch.
I think that there were some maven build breaks due to mvn 2.0.6 and
features.txt not being packed. I fixed that this morning (currently
on the
west coast US).
You have to use maven 2.0.8 or later.
There is one more on the list at the moment, but I am not certain
what is
(yet)
Ian
On 18 Nov 2008, at 14:32, Chris Chabot wrote:
branching sounds good, I don't know if people have any big
supprising
patches scheduled, but if so please hold them back until we did
branch :)
I'd say lets branch tomorrow afternoon? If everyone else feels
ready for
that too.
Then we can take a few days to kick the tires and make sure nothing
squeaks
to hard or falls appart, but in general I think our code tends to be
stable
anyhow so I don't expect to many surprises.
Ps, we did have a couple of 'maven build broke' mails on the
shindig-dev
list in the recent weeks, is there anything in there that should
worry us
before releasing?
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 8:45 PM, Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I'm back now.
What if we branch (code freeze) now and you patch the
serialization into
that?
We really do need a code freeze at minimum this week.
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 7:15 AM, Ian Boston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Chris,
I don't think that we (I) have fully resolved the XML
serialization
issues
in the Java OS side.
Everything works and is compliant with the 0.8.1 text, but there
are
some
ambiguities, and the XSD is certainly not the one in the Spec
(which
didn't
match the intent of the text).... and may be different from the
PHP
code.
There is also an open issue of the discussions for this in 0.9
pending
feedback from the PoCo community.
----
We also have 1 blocker bug in the Java Side
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-497
This could be invalid, but certainly need checking IMHO.
We also have a number of blocker feature request, which may have
been
categorized incorrectly
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-561
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-560
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-559
I would be happy to go with these as known issues in the 1.0
release,
although I feel that *I* should really fix/check 497 upto the
current
XML
state.
-----------
I can do a maven assembly plugin to generate the artifacts
(including
the
php tarball) and check that the release plugin works.
I assume that the php tarball just need to be the source tree,
excluding
the java subtree... or is it more complex than that ?
Ian
On 18 Nov 2008, at 08:07, Chris Chabot wrote:
I was just thinking the same ... the php part is pretty much
ready for a
release, I need to apply 2 or 3 more patches that are in JIRA
and it's
good
to go.
On the java side their ready to rock too, however the guy who's
the
most
likely packager of the release, Kevin Brown, has a family
emergency
last
and
this week.
So my suggestion is to wait a few days more to see if he'll be
able to
join
the release effort, and then set this in motion.
Will be nice to finally have a real 'release' out there :)
-- Chris
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 7:14 AM, Brian McCallister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
Nudge, 17th is here and passing :-)
On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 5:38 AM, Chris Chabot
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
So nov 17th sounds good to everyone? (conditional on having
no major
glitches in the meantime ofc)
I think Tarball for PHP and normal maven release for java
sounds good
to
everyone too right?
We should also consider who will write the big announcement
post (and
no
I'm
not volunteering :)), since it'll be quite a milestone, our
first
'real
incubation' release!
-- Chris
On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 6:25 AM, Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 3:01 AM, Chris Chabot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
The good news here is that there's some progress being made
on the
REST+OAuth front, i got some great patches from Joseph
Smarr for
this
which
I'll be working to integrate into php-shindig these days.
OAuth was the last remaining big blocker, so that's really
exciting
news!
There's a few small remaining items in JIRA that needs to
be fixed
before
php-shindig is completely ready, the tiered message bundle
support
being
one, and checking the rss feed makeRequest processor format
being
another
that I can think of from the top of my head, their smaller
changes
though,
so I'm sure we'll be able to tackle and verify them inside
of 2
weeks.
There are a few improvements that would be nice to get in
before
then,
unit
tests for the new social api implementation being one of
them, but
none
of
those things are worth considering release-blockers (it's
been long
enough
already), however if someone has some time to contribute to
that,
patches
are very welcome! :)
How does Nov 17th sound for a possible release date? That
would
give
us 2
working weeks to finish stuff up
Oh ps, does java-shindig support 3 legged oauth yet? I
would hope
we'd
get
that in for both the php and java versions in the 1.0
release since
that
seems essential for the full potential of rest /
portablecontacts /
mobile
and server to server development.
It's semi-supported, but currently would require a lot of
work from
integrators. Louis and Brian were both looking into this
recently,
and
I
don't know how much work would be needed to finish it.
-- Chris
On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 12:57 AM, Ian Boston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I am ok for a branch, it would be good to check how the
release is
going
to
be done with the mix of java and php, as I would assume
this wont
just
be
a
tarball of the source tree ?
Some blocker issues
------------------------
I have a minor concern and some advice needed on
SHINDIG-562,
which
is
the
blocker on the XML format for the RPC interface.
There were a reasonable number of issues/bugs in the XSD
that was
released
for 0.8.1 in the spec.
These will be fixed in 0.9, but if I implement to the
0.8.1 it
will
change
on the next release and wont be backwards compatible.
I could take what I think the XSD for 0.9 would look
like... but
thats
not
final, and this will need to replace the BeanXmlConverter
and
BeanAtomConverter beans that are currently wired in. There
is a
new
XStream
based converter that is lighter, faster and easier to use
that
would
replace
these 2 but is not currently wired into the module.
Options:
1. Make SHINDIG-562 major and don't deliver compliant XML
in the
release.
2. Deliver to the 0.8.1 XSD as stands and expect to see
major
change
3. Deliver to a very early draft of the 0.9 XSD and expect
some
minor
fixes.
I would like to do 3, but that might be premature.
---------------------
SHINDIG-561, SHINDIG-497 both blockers will be easy once
562 is
fixed.
---------------------
Ian
On 1 Nov 2008, at 02:13, Kevin Brown wrote:
Hi everybody,
We've sort of waffled on release for a while now, and I'd
like to
get
the
ball rolling again. Things seem pretty stable right now,
but if we
don't
move to get a release the spec process is going to make
releasing
soon
very
difficult.
So lets lock down and get released.
We're pretty much fully 0.8.1 compliant (barring a few
minor
issues).
We
have some of the 0.9 stuff already implemented, but we
should not
consider
that "advertised" yet until it's really finalized and
developers
start
expecting it.
So, where do we stand? Can everyone agree on a branch and
release
two
weeks
from now?
I'd like this to be the "1.0" release, with the next
release
including
support for opensocial 0.9. I don't feel that it's a good
idea to
align
our
versions with the specifications versions, but we should
include
something
in our version string or release notes that makes
compatibility
obvious.
Shindig will be 1 year old on December 12th (well, it's
technically
a
few
weeks older than that but that's the oldest commit I can
find in
SVN).
Surely we can get a release out before then!
