> think that we can move Syncope 1.1.0 to ConnId 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT, thus avoid > branching. >
Any objections to me moving the Syncope trunk pom to use 1.3.3-SNAPSHOT, and the SNAPSHOT versions of the Connector bundles? Colm. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Colm O hEigeartaigh <[email protected]>wrote: > > 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 > -- Colm O hEigeartaigh Talend Community Coder http://coders.talend.com
