> Given the retro-compatibility feature reported above, if confirmed > working, I think that we can move Syncope 1.1.0 to ConnId 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT, > thus avoid branching. > > Sorry for not having made this re-thinking clear.
Ah, ok got it, thanks. Colm. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Francesco Chicchiriccò < [email protected]> wrote: > On 19/02/2013 13:04, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote: > >> Hi Francesco, >> >> I thought we could avoid this branching if we are able to verify that >>> you can use "old" (e.g. compiled against ConnId 1.3.2) connectors with "new" >>> (e.g. 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT) framework, >>> >> >> Ok, I guess I misunderstood. I understand that we want to run an "old" >> connector with the new framework, and so for example the CSV 0.6.x branch >> should be able to run against the 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT framework version. >> >> I don't understand though how we can avoid branching DB + LDAP if we want >> to have the fixes I mentioned available in Syncope 1.1? >> > > Given the retro-compatibility feature reported above, if confirmed > working, I think that we can move Syncope 1.1.0 to ConnId 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT, > thus avoid branching. > > Sorry for not having made this re-thinking clear. > > Regards. > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 19/02/2013 12:51, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote: >>> >>> How about a new branch for the LDAP + DB bundles that I can backport >>>> >>>>> fixes to? >>>>> >>>>> In terms of the DB Connector first, trunk is at 2.1.5-SNAPSHOT. How >>>> about >>>> I >>>> update trunk to 2.2-SNAPSHOT + create a new branch called "2.1.X" (with >>>> version 2.1.5-SNAPSHOT) before the recent revisions were made? I will >>>> then >>>> selectively merge various fixes. Any objections to this? >>>> >>>> I thought we could avoid this branching if we are able to verify that >>> you >>> can use "old" (e.g. compiled against ConnId 1.3.2) connectors with "new" >>> (e.g. 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT) framework, >>> >>> Am I wrong? >>> >>> Regards. >>> >>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Fabio Martelli >>> >>>> <[email protected]>****wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Il giorno 19/feb/2013, alle ore 11.44, Colm O hEigeartaigh ha scritto: >>>> >>>>> Guys, I'd prefere to keep the 1.3.2 for Syncope 1.1.0. >>>>> >>>>>> Since we are expecting to release soon I'd like to be sure about the >>>>>>> reliability of the 1.1.0. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why do you think 1.3.3 would be particularly unreliable? There have >>>>>> not >>>>>> been many fixes made from what I can see. >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't have strong objections to using 1.3.2 for Syncope 1.1, >>>>>> however I >>>>>> would like if the fixes I've made make it into Syncope for 1.1. I will >>>>>> backport the CSV fixes to the branch. How about a new branch for the >>>>>> >>>>>> LDAP + >>>>> >>>>> DB bundles that I can backport fixes to? In particular I would like to >>>>>> >>>>>> have >>>>> >>>>> LDAP-2, LDAP-5 and LDAP-6 available in Syncope 1.1. >>>>>> >>>>>> OK Colm, probably we can do the following. >>>>> Since I'd like to maintain the possibility to switch from a newest >>>>> connector version to an old one I'd ask you to verify before the >>>>> possibility to run, for example, CsvDir 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT with the latest >>>>> framework version. >>>>> If I well remember this should be possible (the opposite is not >>>>> possible >>>>> for sure). This would be sufficient to have my +1. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> F. >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Fabio Martelli >>>>> >>>>>> <[email protected]>****wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Il giorno 19/feb/2013, alle ore 11.28, Colm O hEigeartaigh ha >>>>>> scritto: >>>>>> >>>>>>> When using the CSVDir 0.7-SNAPSHOT we would be forced to use ConnId >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT instead of 1.3.2. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Is there any reason why we can't just do that on trunk anyway? I >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> assume >>>>>>>> we're going to release Syncope 1.1 with ConnId 1.3.3 anyway? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Guys, I'd prefere to keep the 1.3.2 for Syncope 1.1.0. >>>>>>> Since we are expecting to release soon I'd like to be sure about the >>>>>>> reliability of the 1.1.0. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> F. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why not backporting your fix on 0.7-SNAPSHOT to 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I will do. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Colm. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 19/02/2013 11:13, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Following the query on the CSV SNAPSHOT in Syncope, just wondering >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> why >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> are >>>>>> >>>>>>> we including 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT on trunk instead of 0.7-SNAPSHOT? The >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> former >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> does not include the fixes I made recently (in particular the >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> properties >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> file is in the wrong package name, and so the correct property keys >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> not >>>>>> >>>>>>> displayed in Syncope). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> When using the CSVDir 0.7-SNAPSHOT we would be forced to use >>>>>>>>>> ConnId >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT instead of 1.3.2. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Why not backporting your fix on 0.7-SNAPSHOT to 0.6.1-SNAPSHOT? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Regards. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> > -- > Francesco Chicchiriccò > > ASF Member, Apache Syncope PMC chair, Apache Cocoon PMC Member > http://people.apache.org/~**ilgrosso/<http://people.apache.org/~ilgrosso/> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "connid-dev" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to > connid-dev+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<connid-dev%[email protected]> > . > Visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/**group/connid-dev?hl=en-US<http://groups.google.com/group/connid-dev?hl=en-US> > . > For more options, visit > https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out> > . > > > -- Colm O hEigeartaigh Talend Community Coder http://coders.talend.com
