Why don't we do a pre-release from this branch? Does apache support this concept? Give it some time in the wild to shake down the bugs?
If not. Let's just release it and document that there is a lot of churn. Give it a 3.0 designation and be prepared to release a series of updates as bugs are identified. The key would be API stability so people could try it and roll back as necessary for production deployments onto a known good code base. Bryan > On May 13, 2014, at 3:18 AM, Peter Firmstone <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 13/05/2014 9:59 AM, Dennis Reedy wrote: >> Apologies for not chiming in earlier, I've been running around with my air >> on fire for the past couple of weeks. As to whether River is dead, I don't >> think it is, maybe mostly dead (in which case a visit to Miracle Max may be >> in order). I think River is static, but not dead. The technology is so >> worth at least maintaining, fixing bugs and continued care and feeding. >> >> The issue to me is that the project has no direction, and River has no >> community that participates and makes decisions as a community. There has >> been tons of work in qa_refactor, is that the future for River? Or is it a >> fork? > > There are develpers who are concerned about the number of fixes made in > qa-refactor, but no one yet has identified an issue I haven't been able to > fix very quickly. In any case the public api and serial form is backward > compatible. > > I encourage the community to test it, find out for themselves and report any > issues. > >> Regards >> >> Dennis >> >> >>> On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Greg Trasuk<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> On May 11, 2014, at 12:30 AM, Peter<[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Ultimately, if community involvement continues to decline, we may have >>> to send River to the attic. >>>> Distributed computing is difficult and we often bump into the >>> shortcomings of the java platform, I think these difficulties are why >>> developers have trouble agreeing on solutions. >>>> But I think more importantly we need increased user involvement. >>>> >>>> Is there any advise or resources we can draw on from other Apache >>> projects? >>> It may be, ultimately, that the community has failed and River is headed >>> to the Attic. The usual question is “Can the project round up the 3 ‘+1’ >>> votes required to make an Apache release?” Historically, we have been able >>> to do that, at least for maintenance releases, and I don’t see that >>> changing, at least for a while. >>> >>> The problem is future development and the ongoing health of the project. >>> On this point, we don’t seem to have consensus on where we want the >>> project to go, and there’s limited enthusiasm for user-focused >>> requirements. Also, my calls to discuss the health of the project have had >>> no response (well, there was a tangent about the build system, but >>> personally I think that misses the point). >>> >>> I will include in the board report the fact that no-one has expressed an >>> interest in taking over as PMC chair, and ask if there are any other expert >>> resources that can help. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Greg Trasuk. >
