Mark, when do you plan to get the 1.0 release out? Time is important. Since there’s a lot of documentation required, wouldn’t this cause further delays? Are we talking about a shippable product in May timeframe, or would we see a release in Feb, possibly in March?
I’m a user of DS, but in order to trust CDI/DS and not move towards Spring. This is a big question for me, and I’m sure for many others (and potential) users too. IMO, it’s a mistake not keep a tight e.g 12 weekly shippable release. Being Agile is key to success. The project has been running for 25+ months now. Reading through sources and looking at the commit-graph from Gerhard. I think you guys deserve to see an uptake of DS. But, binaries needs to be pushed to central. I’d say: -1 for 1.0 && +1 for 0.6. br, ove On 16. feb. 2014, at 16:39, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> wrote: > 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 >>
