Hey Suresh, On Feb 6, 2012, at 8:16 AM, Suresh Marru wrote:
> On Feb 6, 2012, at 11:15 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: > >> Hi Suresh, >> >> Great enthusiasm and good job putting the below email together. >> >> Since we are still VOTE'ing on 0.2 and since there are limited >> mentor cycles (and developer cycles), do you think we should try >> and push for a 0.3 release so quickly (even before the 0.2 release >> has been made?). >> >> If so, and you have the energy, I'll try and help but you may want >> to wait and see how 0.2 goes because there are steps (some which >> take 48hrs+ after a successful VOTE) that need to be done to >> finalize the release. > Hi Chris, > > I have a feeling we are curbing developer enthusiasm and energy while we get > the releases right. So I am trying to keep the momentum going through. The > solution I propose is, when we think we are ready with a release branch it > and move forward. I am fully aware of the overhead we will be adding to merge > them, I am volunteering to ensure all branches will sync up by the time we > catch up with release cycles. Well you can't beat volunteer energy and people who sign up for the things they propose :) Good man. At Apache there's a famous mantra I'd like you to keep in your head: "those who do, decide." Good job and I'll be right there to help as you're doing. Cheers, Chris > > Suresh >> >> Cheers, >> Chris >> >> On Feb 6, 2012, at 7:01 AM, Suresh Marru wrote: >> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> While we working through release semantics on the 0.2-incubating-snapshot >>> branch, the trunk moved quite significantly. Great job from every one in >>> marching ahead. I think we are in a good position for an immediate >>> 0.3-incubating release. Any thoughts or objections to this plan? >>> >>> I see the following feature additions since 0.2 is branched in december: >>> >>> * Grid submissions to supercomputers are now working for basic >>> applications. >>> * Registry and workflow launching now have cool API's so web interfaces can >>> be built against. >>> * User interface have been improved but this looks like work in progress. >>> * Workflows now have For-Each iterative support, looks like there are open >>> tickets on this issues, but workable within this week. >>> * Registry is now persisting state information from workflow launches and >>> progress >>> * Workflows have provenance aware capabilities so the execution begins from >>> the mid workflow where data is available. >>> >>> Please add/modify to the list, but I see these are significant improvements >>> mandating a release. I propose the following release preparation for 0.3: >>> * Since there are enough features already call a feature freeze immediately. >>> * Wrap up any changes to these features, test document and make a code >>> freeze by Friday 02/10 >>> * Make a release over next weekend. >>> >>> This plan assumes the current voting 0.2 release goes through. If we find >>> blockers in 0.2, I still suggest to stick to 0.3 release plan, branch it >>> and let the trunk move forward. I am getting bothered with trunk advancing >>> too much without a release. >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Suresh >> >> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. >> Senior Computer Scientist >> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA >> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 >> Email: [email protected] >> WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department >> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: [email protected] WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
