+1 to starting with the package renames on Friday.

  ...ant

On 5/10/07, Venkata Krishnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

+1 for controlled commits.  If people will ensure no commits on Thursday
after about 24.00Hrs Pacific Time (US and Canada), I can go ahead and
change
the core-spi packages to include 'sca'.  Ant, please let me know if there
are other things that I can help with.  I am also going to start looking
at
getting the spec-api itest to work.

Thanks

- Venkat

On 5/9/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 5/8/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Raymond Feng wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I tried a bit to rename some of the packages (not adding sca yet)
but
> > > I just realized that it became a bit out of control with the flood
of
> > > check-ins.
> > >
> > > Maybe the best way is that we agree on the naming convention for the
> > > core-spi and core and then have one person to do all the refactoring
> > > in one shot once we see a functionally stable code base.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Raymond
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Venkata Krishnan"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: <[email protected]>
> > > Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 10:48 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Status of Java SCA 0.90 release
> > >
> > >
> > >> Hi.. .what  about the workitem related to renaming the core-spi to
> > >> include
> > >> 'sca' for packages.  Is it a good time to do this ?  Thanks
> > >>
> > >> - Venkat
> > >>
> > >> On 5/4/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> On 5/4/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > ant elder wrote:
> > >>> > > There's been a lot of progress, things are starting to look
good
> > >>> and
> > >>> > most
> > >>> > > things on the wiki page (
> > >>> > >
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> >
>
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANY/Java+SCA+Next+Release+Contents
> > >>>
> > >>> > )
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > look like they're nearing completion. So I think what we
should
> > >>> do is
> > >>> > > aim at
> > >>> > > creating an SVN branch for the release around Tuesday next
week,
> > >>> > > start
> > >>> > > being
> > >>> > > more controlled about what changes go into the branch and
start
> > >>> > > publishing
> > >>> > > candidate distributions from that, then when we think it looks
> > >>> ok > > vote
> > >>> > on
> > >>> > > the final release candidate from that, hopefully by the end of
> > next
> > >>> > week.
> > >>> > > Does this sound ok to everyone? It does mean most changes
anyone
> > >>> > > wants
> > >>> > in
> > >>> > > should be tried to be committed by Tuesday.
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > The latest distribution downloads to try out are available at:
> > >>> > > http://people.apache.org/~antelder/tuscany/latest/
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > There's now a Java-SCA-0.90 version in Jira so any bugs found
or
> > >>> things
> > >>> > > people want to get done should be added there:
> > >>> > >
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> >
>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&mode=hide&sorter/order=DESC&sorter/field=priority&resolution=-1&pid=12310210&fixfor=12312478
> > >>>
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > >   ...ant
> > >>> > >
> > >>> >
> > >>> > +1 from me. Like you said a lot of what we had on the Wiki are
> near
> > >>> > completion. One of the most important items I think is to
complete
> > >>> the
> > >>> > clean up of the code base and simplify further some of our
> > interfaces
> > >>> > for extensions, but Tuesday looks reasonable to me.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > --
> > >>> > Jean-Sebastien
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >>> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Sounds like a good timescale to me. Gives time to finish the
> sample
> > >>> builds
> > >>> and readmes.
> > >>>
> > >>> Simon
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> > There has been many commits and good progress the last few days, so I
> > spent a little bit of time checking the status of the trunk.
> >
> > Here's a summary of what I found:
> > - The code cleanup is almost complete, I think there's a little bit
work
> > left to refactor one last .spi. package, remove a few dead classes,
also
> > it looks like Raymond has started to clean up the Scope registry and
> > WorkContext I'm not sure if it's finished or not.
> > - The Java, Script and RMI extensions are now stable, as well as the
> > sample implementation, binding, and data binding extensions.
> > - It looks like we have a reasonable Web app story with a servlet
> > context listener, but it may require a little bit of cleanup to avoid
> > confusion with sca-contribution.xml. I'm also not sure if it allows to
> > expose Web Services from a Web app, or if we even want to do that now.
> >
> > Main todo's that I could think of:
> > - Port the Web Service binding extension to the latest code, as it's
> > really important to have, and is also used by many integration tests.
> > - Run RAT and check licenses and notices.
> > - Check why the itest/spec-api test cases are failing.
> > - Create a JAR containing the source of our runtime, to help debugging
> > in an IDE.
> > - Are the samples build.xml finished?
> > - I have ported the Spring extension to the latest code but need to do
a
> > little bit of cleanup tomorrow before committing it.
> > - I'm not sure about the JSONRPC binding, wouldn't it be nice to have
it
> > too?
> > - Lazy loading of our modules to avoid loading too many dependencies
> > when using tuscany-sca-all.jar.
> > - Rename the packages to *.sca.* but I would suggest to delay this to
a
> > later point some time next week after our first RC.
> >
> > And there's probably a few more :)
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Sebastien
>
>
> We've made tons of progress on all these things so the release is
looking
> really close to being ready and the time approaching to either cut a
> branch
> or switch to a more controlled commit mode on the trunk.  Hopefully we
> could
> do this tomorrow, so this is just a fyi to start getting all your last
> minute changes in...
>
>    ...ant
>

Reply via email to