imo v0.6 is way overdue. @nik: that's the issue - there are still several undocumented parts (also see e.g. [1]) and there are only few examples.
regards, gerhard [1] http://s.apache.org/gf9 2014-02-16 16:39 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de>: > I'd be +1 for 1.0 > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > > > On Sunday, 16 February 2014, 14:52, Nicklas Karlsson <nicka...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > (the rumors of my demise is somewhat exaggerated ;-) > > > >After migrating some applications from Seam 2 to Seam 3 (and then have > Seam > >3 "run out of steam"), I recommended migrating to DeltaSpike so I have > some > >interest in DeltaSpike not end up the same way, that would be... > >professionally embarrassing ;-) > > > >Although I'm not obsessed with version numbers, I know several people who > >are and a 1.0 would certainly attract attention (and hopefully > >contributors). OTOH, one must be careful not to destroy the reputation of > >the framework by releasing too early and give a crappy first impression. > >Even if there are not that many fancy features, if the existing ones are > >well documented and accompanied by examples, people are usually more > >forgiving. > > > >Having said that, I might be able to contribute some company time on e.g. > >the JSF module (since we are using that, too). > > > >regards, > > - Nik > > > > > > > >On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Ove Ranheim <oranh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Dear DS team! > >> > >> Two months ago the team discussed a 0.6 release. What is your plan? > There > >> are many new great features since 0.5, so what is stopping the DS-team > to > >> provide a new release? > >> > >> Looking through the JIRA there are 30 open issues, many of them regards > >> JSF and Tests. I don't use JSF anymore, so it hurts to be held back by > >> stack-releases. > >> > >> 6 out of 30 are Improvements. > >> 7 are New Features. > >> 1 is a Wish of porting Seam Mail. Cody has discontinued development of > >> Seam Mail, so this issue could probably be Resolved/Won't fix. > >> > >> If you constrain the release window to only bug fixing it looks like 14 > >> issues should be moved to 0.7. > >> 16 issues are real issues that needs to be decided upon. > >> > >> Would it make sense to elect on some big tickets to get 0.6 out? > >> > >> 15 months ago DS was proposed to be incubated. IMHO, if DS is going to > be > >> a success, regular releases is a key factor. > >> > >> It's been five months since last 0.5 release. > >> > >> regards, > >> ove > >> > >> > >> On 12. nov. 2013, at 16:28, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> wrote: > >> > >> > yea, but what are the alternatives? > >> > If you have a better idea, then tell us :) > >> > > >> > The problem is that it's not only about the JSF module but about all > >> other modules as well. > >> > > >> > LieGrue, > >> > strub > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > >> >> From: Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petra...@gmail.com> > >> >> To: dev@deltaspike.apache.org > >> >> Cc: > >> >> Sent: Tuesday, 12 November 2013, 16:18 > >> >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] next release version? 0.6 or 1.0? > >> >> > >> >> @mark: > >> >> i never said that we should do #2. > >> >> > >> >> regards, > >> >> gerhard > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 2013/11/12 Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> > >> >> > >> >>> Pete, Gerhard > >> >>> > >> >>> The Problem here is that there are only 2 ways to handle the > situation: > >> >>> > >> >>> 1.) all modules share the same version but have different maturity > >> grades > >> >>> > >> >>> 2.) each module has it's very own version. A 0.x reflects > instability, > >> >> 1.x > >> >>> reflects maturity. But you know what happened with exactly this > >> approach in > >> >>> Seam3? The problem is that users do not know which version of > >> ds-jsf-api > >> >>> works together with which version of ds-core-impl for example. It > gets > >> much > >> >>> more complicated with later modules. > >> >>> > >> >>> Thus I prefer 1.). > >> >>> > >> >>> LieGrue, > >> >>> strub > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>>> ________________________________ > >> >>>> From: Pete Muir <pm...@redhat.com> > >> >>>> To: dev@deltaspike.apache.org > >> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, 12 November 2013, 14:35 > >> >>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] next release version? 0.6 or 1.0? > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> +1 to Gerhard's point (I am looking to try to find someone to help > >> with > >> >>> docs, but the person I had in mind just left Red Hat :-(. Also +1 to > >> going > >> >>> to 1.0 soon (i.e. making docs and stability a priority!). > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> On 11 Nov 2013, at 23:09, Gerhard Petracek > >> >> <gerhard.petra...@gmail.com> > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>>> if we move to v1 soon, we need an useful versioning strategy, > >> >> better > >> >>> docs > >> >>>>> and examples + the api and spi need to be stable for some time (in > >> >> the > >> >>> best > >> >>>>> case until v2+). > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> regards, > >> >>>>> gerhard > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> 2013/11/11 Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> how should that work? > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> Please note that we will have some not perfectly finished > >> >> modules very > >> >>>>>> often. Basically whenever we add a new module... > >> >>>>>> There is just no way to avoid this other than making those > >> >> modules own > >> >>>>>> releases. But this does not work out neither (as seen on a few > >> >> other > >> >>>>>> projects I don't like to name). > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> LieGrue, > >> >>>>>> strub > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> ________________________________ > >> >>>>>>> From: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > >> >>>>>>> To: Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de>; > >> >> dev@deltaspike.apache.org > >> >>>>>>> Sent: Monday, 11 November 2013, 20:54 > >> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] next release version? 0.6 or 1.0? > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> Well if code is released it should be stable or > >> >> explicitely in > >> >>>>>> alpha/beta..maybe we should do subreleases for unstables > >> >> modules > >> >>>>>>> Le 11 nov. 2013 18:43, "Mark Struberg" > >> >> <strub...@yahoo.de> a écrit : > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> Oki folks, txs 4 the feedback, all! > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> I'd say we should create the > >> >> module-maturity-matrix.md first and > >> >>> then > >> >>>>>> we might do the version bump. > >> >>>>>>>> Maybe something like green/blue/orange/red for mature > >> >> / ready but > >> >>> still > >> >>>>>> needs a few features / ready but might change it's api > >> >> still / work in > >> >>>>>> progress > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> LieGrue, > >> >>>>>>>> strub > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >> >>>>>>>>> From: Charles Moulliard <ch0...@gmail.com> > >> >>>>>>>>> To: dev@deltaspike.apache.org > >> >>>>>>>>> Cc: Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> > >> >>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, 11 November 2013, 18:25 > >> >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] next release version? 0.6 > >> >> or 1.0? > >> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> +1 to move to 1.0. We have done the same thing > >> >> with Apache Aries > >> >>> moving > >> >>>>>>>>> Blueprint from 0.5 to 1.0 release > >> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 6:17 PM, John D. Ament > >> >>>>>>>>> <john.d.am...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>> Yep, agreed. Users care about the version #. > >> >> I would recommend > >> >>>>>> that if we > >> >>>>>>>>>> could release a 1.0 based on the current code > >> >> base + some > >> >>> additional > >> >>>>>> bug > >> >>>>>>>>>> fixes we'll get huge wins. > >> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>> +1 to switching current to 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT. > >> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Mark > >> >> Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de > >> >>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi! > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> In the last 2 months I did a few > >> >> conference talks and smaller > >> >>>>>>>>>>> presentations (OpenBlend, W-JAX, ..) and > >> >> always got the same > >> >>>>>>>>> questions: > >> >>>>>>>>>>> "it's only a 0.x version, so is > >> >> it already stable? I > >> >>>>>>>>> don't like to use it > >> >>>>>>>>>>> in production with 0.x" > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> And the actual answer is: "well, > >> >> core, cdictrl, etc are stable > >> >>>>>>>>> since a > >> >>>>>>>>>>> long time, other modules are not yet 100% > >> >> where we like them". > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The other fact is that we will never get > >> >> all our modules 100% > >> >>>>>> stable. > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Because new modules cannot be released > >> >> with the same quality than > >> >>>>>>>>>>> established and well known and bugfixed > >> >> modules. > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thus I think we should rather introduce a > >> >> kind of majurity-matrix > >> >>>>>> for > >> >>>>>>>>>>> DeltaSpike. > >> >>>>>>>>>>> A simple list of modules and their > >> >> majurity grade. > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> By officially moving to 1.0 we would gain > >> >> much more users. > >> >>>>>>>>>>> I personally do not care about numbers, > >> >> but LOTS of users do! > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Wdyt? > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> LieGrue, > >> >>>>>>>>>>> strub > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>> -- > >> >>>>>>>>> Charles Moulliard > >> >>>>>>>>> Apache Committer / Architect @RedHat > >> >>>>>>>>> Twitter : @cmoulliard | Blog : > >> >> http://cmoulliard.github.io > >> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> > >> > > > > > >-- > >Nicklas Karlsson, +358 40 5062266 > >Vaakunatie 10 as 7, 20780 Kaarina > > > > >
