It is quiet around here, I am new, could you please explain why you feel a
Maven build structure is needed?

Thanks,
Jake



On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 1:05 PM, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> Anyone out there?
>
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 9:23 AM, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Congrats on the release.  Now that has been completed, I'd like to see
> > if you guys are willing to revisit the issue of a maven based build.
> > If yes, I'd be happy to assist making that happen.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Hiram
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 10:35 PM, Patrick Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Our first official Apache release has shipped and I'm already looking
> >> forward to 3.1.0. ;-)
> >>
> >> In particular I believe we should look at the following for 3.1.0:
> >>
> >> 1) there are a number of issues that we're targeted to 3.1.0 during the
> >> 3.0.0 cycle. We need to review and address these.
> >>
> >> 2) system test. During 3.0.0 we made significant improvements to our
> test
> >> environment. However we still lack a large(r) scale system test
> environment.
> >> It would be great if we could simulate large scale use over 10s or 100s
> of
> >> machines (ensemble + clients). We need some sort of framework for this,
> and
> >> of course tests.
> >>
> >> 3) operations documentation. In general docs were greatly improved in
> 3.x
> >> over 2.x. One area we are still lacking is operations docs for
> >> design/management of a ZK cluster.
> >> see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-160
> >>
> >> 4) JMX. Documentation needs to be written & the code reviewed/improved.
> >> Moving to Java6 should (afaik) allow us to take advantage of improved
> JMX
> >> spec not available in 5. We should also consider making JMX the default
> >> rather than optional (ie you get JMX by default when ZK server is
> started).
> >> We need to ensure that ops can monitor/admin ZK using JMX.
> >>
> >> 5) (begin) multi-tenancy support. A number of users have expressed
> interest
> >> in being able to deploy ZK as a service in a cloud. Multi-tenancy
> support
> >> would be a huge benefit (quota, qos, namespace partitioning of nodes,
> >> billing, etc...)
> >>
> >> Of course ZooKeeper is open to submissions in that aren't on this list.
> If
> >> you have any suggestions please feel free to enter a JIRA or submit a
> patch.
> >>
> >>
> >> Additionally I'd like to see us move to an 8 week release cycle. I've
> >> updated the JIRA version list to reflect this. Due to the holiday season
> >> approaching I've listed 3.1.0 with a ship date of Jan 19th. (see the
> roadmap
> >> on the JIRA).
> >>
> >> If you have any questions/comments please reply to this email.
> >>
> >> Patrick
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Hiram
> >
> > Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
> >
> > Open Source SOA
> > http://open.iona.com
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Hiram
>
> Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
>
> Open Source SOA
> http://open.iona.com
>

Reply via email to