This might be too wacky but I thought I'd offer it up anyway. It looks like we are going to go with a 1.0 release from trunk RSN. We known 2.0 will break BC and will come in a o.a.c.imaging2 package. So, why not release 1.0 in a package o.a.c.imaging1?
Gary On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 3:40 PM, Damjan Jovanovic <[email protected]> wrote: > Wow, that's a really good idea! > > Yes it's feasible. If you'd like to write and commit a patch for it, feel > free. > > Damjan > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Matt Benson <[email protected]> wrote: > > If the API will be extensible, that's perhaps a different matter, > although > > in that case maybe the extensible part should be an interface implemented > > by ImageFormat's constants. In this case we could convert ImageFormat to > an > > enum now and still make the API extensible later on. > > > > Does this sound feasible? > > > > Matt > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Damjan Jovanovic <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> I would like to avoid an enum there for later versions because I'd > >> like to make the API extensible with user-defined image formats, but > >> we can add it for 1.0.0. > >> > >> Damjan > >> > >> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Matt Benson <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > At some point I had had it in mind that ImageFormat should be > converted > >> to > >> > a proper enum type. Can anyone offer any reasons this should not be > >> done, > >> > particularly before 1.0.0? > >> > > >> > Matt > >> > > >> > > >> > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Damjan Jovanovic < > [email protected] > >> >wrote: > >> > > >> >> Yes I agree, we might as well release trunk as 1.0.0. I am fixing the > >> >> last few bugs in Jira, and then let's get started with the release > >> >> :-). Support would be appreciated. > >> >> > >> >> Damjan > >> >> > >> >> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Raul Kripalani <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> >> > Hello, > >> >> > > >> >> > @Gregory – many thanks for your input. You surely belong very valid > >> >> points > >> >> > to the discussion. > >> >> > > >> >> > The issue I see is that Apache Sanselan 0.97 has such a wide > adoption > >> in > >> >> > the community that even in spite of the last public release being > an > >> >> > Incubator one, it has earned itself the status of a de-facto > library > >> for > >> >> > image processing out there. It's quite mature and stable for the > >> standard > >> >> > use cases. IMHO, release 0.97 has the status and bearing of a > release > >> >> 1.0.0 > >> >> > already. > >> >> > > >> >> > Want it or not, this means that you'll find yourself supporting the > >> >> current > >> >> > API baseline for quite some time ;-) Bear in mind that the Sanselan > >> use > >> >> > cases are typically quite static: once you've built your image > >> processing > >> >> > functionality into your app, it'll probably remain untouched for a > >> long > >> >> > time. So the user has some functional changes to make in your app, > >> they > >> >> > won't consider upgrading, let alone investing the effort to adapt > >> their > >> >> > code to an entirely new API just for the sake of it. > >> >> > > >> >> > So, in a nutshell, it seems adequate to publish the current trunk > as > >> >> > version 1.0.0, as folks are indeed already treating it as such out > >> there. > >> >> > > >> >> > @Damjan – what's your take? I can support you these days if you > >> decide to > >> >> > push out 1.0.0 now! > >> >> > > >> >> > Regards, > >> >> > > >> >> > *Raúl Kripalani* > >> >> > Apache Camel PMC Member & Committer | Enterprise Architect, Open > >> Source > >> >> > Integration specialist > >> >> > http://about.me/raulkripalani | > >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani > >> >> > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk > >> >> > > >> >> > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Gary Gregory < > [email protected] > >> >> >wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 10:30 AM, Gary Gregory < > >> [email protected] > >> >> >> >wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Damjan Jovanovic < > >> [email protected] > >> >> >> >wrote: > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> Well as the only committer that's really working on the > >> internals, I > >> >> >> >> am wondering what to do myself now. > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> I've been working on (and have almost finished) a very large > >> change > >> >> >> >> affecting virtually everything. When I commit it, the API will > >> come > >> >> >> >> apart at the seams :-/, and people will not be very happy with > the > >> >> >> >> rewrites of their own code they'll be doing. > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Which of the following would be best: > >> >> >> >> 1. Releasing what is in SVN trunk now (maybe minus another API > >> >> >> >> breaking change from a few months ago) as 1.0, then adding my > >> large > >> >> >> >> API-breaking change which will eventually be released as > version > >> 2.0. > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Remember that you'll have to change the package name and Maven > >> >> >> coordinates > >> >> >> > for 2.0. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> >> The good news is that version 0.97 is in the old package name > >> >> >> org.apache.sanselan. This means no jar hell for 1.0 > >> >> >> (org.apache.commons.imaging) vs. 0.97. 1.0 which will co-exist > with > >> >> 0.97 in > >> >> >> the same class loader. With option (1), upgrading from 0.97 to 1.0 > >> will > >> >> >> mean AT LEAST updating all package imports, not that bad. Make > sure > >> you > >> >> >> write good release notes ;) > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Let me also offer a bit of perspective for your consideration. > >> >> Releasing an > >> >> >> option (1) 1.0 means supporting it to some extent on the ML and > with > >> >> >> possible maintenance releases. Since 2.0 is incompatible, do you > >> really > >> >> >> want to take on maintaining two large code bases (or three if you > >> count > >> >> >> 0.97)? Right now, there seems to be only one committer with deep > >> domain > >> >> >> knowledge, you ;) Another possibility -- your (3) -- would be to > >> "flush > >> >> >> out" another (last?) 0.x "release" to get trunk out there for 0.x > >> users, > >> >> >> then release 1.0 which would be the new API. It seems > self-defeating > >> to > >> >> >> release a 1.0 knowing the API is not going to live going forward > to > >> 2.0. > >> >> >> With option (2), you are saying, [imaging] has learned its > lessons in > >> >> >> alpha, it has now grown up to a 1.0-level releasable API. What I > do > >> not > >> >> >> know is how close you are to the new API being done. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> In the end, you know the audience best and users that adopt a 0.x > >> >> product > >> >> >> should know that they are taking on a certain level of risk. In > >> >> addition, > >> >> >> no one is forcing them to update to 1.0. Since you are doing the > >> work, > >> >> I'll > >> >> >> support your efforts with option (1). If you called for a [POLL] > >> email > >> >> on > >> >> >> the user's ML, my guess is that users would be happy with a > >> non-breaking > >> >> >> 1.0 release. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> I know that our release process is painful, you might have seen > >> >> discussions > >> >> >> about it recently, but keep on going, it seems we are close. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Gary > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Gary > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> 2. Adding my large change now and API-breaking everything in > >> trunk, > >> >> >> >> then releasing that as 1.0. > >> >> >> >> 3. Releasing what is in SVN trunk now (maybe minus another API > >> >> >> >> breaking change from a few months ago) as 0.98, then > API-breaking > >> >> >> >> everything, and then either releasing a 0.99 or 1.0. (This is > >> >> probably > >> >> >> >> the hardest option, and may not be possible, since version > >> numbering > >> >> >> >> of nightly builds will go backwards and JIRA bugs will need to > be > >> >> >> >> changed.) > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Thoughts? Preferences? > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Regards > >> >> >> >> Damjan > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Raul Kripalani < > [email protected] > >> > > >> >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> >> > Hello all, > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > Are there any plans for releasing 1.0.0 soon? > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > The last commit was 2 months old and the community will > >> hands-down > >> >> >> >> benefit > >> >> >> >> > from a GA release that includes the bugfixes and code renames > >> from > >> >> >> >> Sanselan > >> >> >> >> > to Commons Imaging, carried out ever since 0.9.7. > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > Can I help in any way? We need the 1.0.0 release for our > >> project to > >> >> >> >> acquire > >> >> >> >> > the fix for IMAGING-49 [1], and we cannot rely on SNAPSHOTs. > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IMAGING-49 > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > Thanks, > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > *Raúl Kripalani* > >> >> >> >> > Apache Camel PMC Member & Committer | Enterprise Architect, > Open > >> >> >> Source > >> >> >> >> > Integration specialist > >> >> >> >> > http://about.me/raulkripalani | > >> >> >> >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani > >> >> >> >> > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> >> >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > -- > >> >> >> > E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] > >> >> >> > Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition< > >> >> >> http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> > >> >> >> > JUnit in Action, Second Edition < > http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> > >> >> >> > Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> > >> >> >> > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com > >> >> >> > Home: http://garygregory.com/ > >> >> >> > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> -- > >> >> >> E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] > >> >> >> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition< > >> >> >> http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> > >> >> >> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/ > > > >> >> >> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> > >> >> >> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com > >> >> >> Home: http://garygregory.com/ > >> >> >> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> >> > >> >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > -- E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com Home: http://garygregory.com/ Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
