A March release with basic functional improvements in a consumable
package
(kernel, selected extensions, and tools) makes sense to me.
As well as the items suggested by Sebastien, I'm interested in adding
flexible ordering of elements in SCDL files as required by the SCA spec.
Having work on these items proceed in a branch so that it does not
conflict
with the restructuring and distributed deployment work going on in trunk
would allow people to be more productive, with less interference between
the different activities in progress.
Simon
Jeremy Boynes wrote:
> Guys,
>
> I'm a little confused here - so far we seem to have 3 different
people
> volunteering to manage 3 different releases. We now have a very very
> long list of "requirements" many of which have not been discussed on
> the list and most of which do not have names against them or really
> relate to the coding that is actually going on; they also don't
seem to
> apply to two out of the three releases. Version numbers are being
> assigned to milestones, we have stabilization branches and end-to-end
> scenarios, all without meaningful discussion on this list.
>
> I think we need to stop and figure out what we are doing as a
> community. Here, on this list, with everyone involved.
> --
> Jeremy
>
> On Feb 6, 2007, at 3:58 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
>
>> Jim Marino wrote:
>>
>>> Sebastien,
>>>
>>> I'm a little surprised that you have not referenced the previous
>>> release discussion thread or any of the work that has been ongoing
>>> in core over the past month and a half:
>>>
>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg12291.html
>>>
>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg13445.html
>>>
>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg12238.html
>>>
>>> Most of the work in core during this period has been aimed at
>>> getting a release of kernel out that supports features outlined in
>>> the first referenced thread. How does your proposal relate to that
>>> release? I'm happy to have two simultaneous release processes going
>>> at once and think it could even be beneficial. However, it would be
>>> helpful if you put your proposal in context so others such as
myself
>>> can understand it a bit better.
>>>
>>> Jim
>>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 5, 2007, at 5:19 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
>>>
>>>> Now that we have a list of requirements on our Wiki at http://
>>>> cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANY/Feature+areas+and+what
>>>> +folks+are+working+on, and a number of people are signing up for
>>>> some of the corresponding work, I'd like to start a discussion on
>>>> the content of our next milestone. Given that our last milestone
>>>> was in December, I'd like to have another milestone soon, by March.
>>>>
>>>> Here's the function that people have already signed up for on the
>>>> Wiki page + what I'm interested in for this milestone:
>>>> - Support for complex properties and multi valued properties
>>>> - Support for SCA deployment-contributions, and in particular
>>>> support for JAR based deployment contributions
>>>> - Ability to reference and resolve composites in an SCA domain
>>>> (would be nice to support recursive composition but I'm not
>>>> particularly interested in it)
>>>> - Ability to configure and override the configuration of
>>>> References, Services and Properties (again here I'd be happy if
>>>> this works with just one or two levels of composition)
>>>> - Support for wiring inside an SCA domain references to services
>>>> with bindings and have the wiring decide the endpoints to use
>>>> - Support for business exceptions in end to end interactions
>>>> - Support for promoting services and references out of a composite
>>>> (without having to wire a reference to a reference or a service to
>>>> a service)
>>>> - Support for defining and configuring services and references
>>>> directly on components
>>>> - Interchangeability / mapping between Java and WSDL interfaces
>>>> - Ability to use, alter and write an SCDL model at deployment
>>>> - WSDL2Java and Java2WSDL support using the SDO databinding
>>>> - Core support for non-blocking invocations playing nicely with
>>>> bindings, and without having to send complete routing paths to the
>>>> services/references
>>>> - Databinding framework with support for conversions between JAXB
>>>> and SDO
>>>> - Working and modular build allowing to build subsets of the
project
>>>> - Services to add(/remove/query) compositions to an SCA domain
>>>> - Services to add(/remove/query) SCA deployment contributions
to an
>>>> SCA domain
>>>> - Core support for addressing, resolving, loading artifacts from
>>>> SCA deployment contributions
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> --Jean-Sebastien
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> Jim,
>>
>> The idea is to bring together a number of pieces from the core
>> runtime, extensions like databinding and WSDL support, tools like
>> WSDL2Java and Java2WSDL etc. and stabilize them to get some of the
>> basic function that I listed in my earlier email working in end to
>> end scenarios. As a first step, we probably need a very small subset
>> of the new deployment story that is being built in the trunk,
>> starting with the ability to work with one SCA composite and one JAR
>> contribution.
>>
>> To have a stable integration by March, I think we need to start this
>> effort now. In order to not disrupt the wider and more innovative
>> work going on in the trunk I'd like to do the
>> integration/stabilization work in a branch, starting with the kernel
>> from the pre-spec-changes branch or a stable level from last week.
>> This will allow the trunk to continue to evolve in parallel and at a
>> faster pace to support things like federated deployment, new
>> management services, JMX support, multiparent classloading, and the
>> latest changes to the Java C&I APIs.
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Sebastien
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
