We can certainly consider that, Ed! The plan is to branch for the 0.5.0 release around the end of the month. If we can get the patch contributed before that then will be easier to make it into the release. After the branching we will likely be more conservative about patches applied to the release branch in order to minimize the risk of destabilizing it.
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Ed Kohlwey <ekohl...@gmail.com> wrote: > I would really like to get the SSH tunnel functionality that we've been > working on into 0.5.0. > > Can we get KNOX-250 added to the target? I've been a bit short on time to > integrate it back into the master branch and make some updates that Larry > has suggested, but hopefully I can in the coming week or two. > > > On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:44 PM, larry mccay <larry.mc...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Folks - >> >> I'd like to summarize a brief conversation that Kevin and I had today >> regarding release planning. >> >> * We should look to branch for a release around the end of August and >> will need to scope the release effort with that timeframe in mind >> * incompatible changes like repackaging everything will likely pull the >> rug out from under work in the community that won't make it in until after >> this branching >> * changing the groupId would be unlikely to hurt anyone since we are not >> currently publishing maven modules with the current id >> * if we cut an 0.5.0 release toward end up the month into early Sept then >> we can follow up with a 1.0 release once the community has had a chance to >> get patches submitted at that time we can take on incompatible changes such >> as repackaging >> >> Bottom line proposal: we branch for an Apache Knox 0.5.0 release at the >> end of July. We will need to scope the jira's for the release based on this >> timeframe. We will include a jira for changing the Maven groupId in this >> release. Inflight work in the community will want to get patches in before >> the 1.0 work begins and specifically before we repackage if they want to >> avoid the thrashing that would be involved with that. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> --larry >> >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 2:07 PM, larry mccay <larry.mc...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Seems like they should be done at the same time to me. >>> Is there some reason that they should be separated in terms of risk of >>> completion or something else? >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Kevin Minder < >>> kevin.min...@hortonworks.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Should we consider the maven groupId change separately from the package >>>> name change? >>>> >>>> >>>> On 8/5/14 1:58 PM, larry mccay wrote: >>>> >>>>> Yes - that is a good point and should be done regardless of version >>>>> designation but certainly if we are to go with a 1.0. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Kevin Minder < >>>>> kevin.min...@hortonworks.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> One important consideration for our next release should be changing at >>>>>> least our maven groupId and possibly our package structure to >>>>>> org.apache.knox. I had always considered this a step we would take >>>>>> as part >>>>>> of a 1.0 release. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 8/5/14 12:24 PM, larry mccay wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Folks - >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think it is time that we begin talking about the next release for >>>>>>> Apache >>>>>>> Knox. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There are quite a few fixed and outstanding jiras that would be >>>>>>> candidates >>>>>>> for this release. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We will need to determine a couple things: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. Version numbering for the release. I believe that we have a couple >>>>>>> options. Having added a number of new features, we will likely make >>>>>>> it >>>>>>> 0.5.0. It may actually be time to consider a 1.0 release though we >>>>>>> will >>>>>>> have to decide on the criteria for this. Given the discussion on >>>>>>> this >>>>>>> topic we will be able to propose an appropriate version number for >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> release. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2. What features and bug fixes are desired and expected by the >>>>>>> community >>>>>>> in >>>>>>> the next release. We have a couple efforts underway by contributors >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> should weigh in on their status and commitment to make the next >>>>>>> release. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 3. A target branch date for the next release. Branching for the >>>>>>> release earlier rather than later will allow us to control which >>>>>>> outstanding features/bug fixes make it into the release but of >>>>>>> course will >>>>>>> require multiple pushes when appropriate. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> thoughts? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --larry >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE >>>>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or >>>>>> entity >>>>>> to which it is addressed and may contain information that is >>>>>> confidential, >>>>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the >>>>>> reader >>>>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby >>>>>> notified that >>>>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or >>>>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have >>>>>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender >>>>>> immediately >>>>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE >>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or >>>> entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is >>>> confidential, privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. >>>> If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby >>>> notified that any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, >>>> disclosure or forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If >>>> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender >>>> immediately and delete it from your system. Thank You. >>>> >>> >>> >> >
