Hello Uze,
Please send replies inline ..
Regards
Bernie
On 4/13/15, 10:52 PM, "???(Uze Choi)" <uzchoi at samsung.com> wrote:
>Hi Bernie,
>
>When the Android port code pushed into android-api branch, it have been
>reviewed and corrected already.
<bnk> it was certainly our hope that by submitting the code a few weeks
ago that the the users of the code would have considered the
implementation and a review would take less time once the code was pushed
to master, but I don?t want to assume that there won?t need to be any
review.
>Moreover, Android port code is physically independent from the underlying
>base layer code.
>I cannot understand why android-api branch merging into master will take
>so much time.
<bnk> is this true, it is my understanding that the C++ API changed
between the 0.9.0 release both with patches submitted to Master and with
code that was delivered as part of the CA branch. Most of these changes
are accounted for in the current Android-API branch but if things go more
smoothly then anticipated we?ll be ahead of schedule.
>
>Anyway, We will let you know how to use the CA layer when you think about
>the android port. (related with second issue)
>This is the typical deployment issue for android jar file packaging and
>we already coped with this issue for service library deliver.
>
>BR, Uze Choi
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Keany, Bernie [mailto:bernie.keany at intel.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 10:22 AM
>To: ???(Uze Choi); iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org
>Cc: isg at lists.iotivity.org
>Subject: Re: [dev] [android-api branch merging plan proposal]: CA and
>master merge status update
>
>Hello Uze,
>
>Our progress to merge the Android-API branch into Master is currently
>blocked by more build problems building the Master for Android. One of
>the issues has been resolved and was an error in the Merge from last
>week. The second error we?re experiencing is in the connectivity
>directory and we?ll send the output log shortly. Once the build problems
>have been resolved we?ll need about a week to integrate the Android-API
>branch into the Master and then we can push for review. I assume that
>review and testing of the roughly 13K lines of code (API, tests and
>samples) can proceed in parallel so that the impact on the release is
>minimized.
>
>If you can assist resolving build issues in the Master for Android then
>we can make progress on Tuesday.
>
>Thanks
>Bernie
>
>From: "Choi) ???(Uze" <uzchoi at samsung.com<mailto:uzchoi at samsung.com>>
>Date: Monday, April 13, 2015 at 2:01 AM
>To:
>"iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org<mailto:iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org>"
><iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org<mailto:iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org>>
>Cc: "isg at lists.iotivity.org<mailto:isg at lists.iotivity.org>"
><isg at lists.iotivity.org<mailto:isg at lists.iotivity.org>>
>Subject: [dev] [android-api branch merging plan proposal]: CA and master
>merge status update
>
>Hi Tim/Bernie,
>
>Now we are fix the issue from the primitive service by CA branch merging.
>Regarding android-api branch merging into master, Could you merge the
>base layer code into master first?
>After android base layer code merging into master, we will sequentially
>merge each primitive service android code into master.
>This is my proposal.
>.by 4/15(wed) Base layer code (android-api) --submit--> master branch
>(Tim/Bernie) .by 4/17(fri) Primitive service code (android-api)
>--submit--> master branch (Uze?s team) Give your opinion for this
>schedule.
>
>BR, Uze Choi
>From:
>iotivity-dev-bounces at lists.iotivity.org<mailto:iotivity-dev-bounces at
>lists.
>iotivity.org> [mailto:iotivity-dev-bounces at lists.iotivity.org] On Behalf
>Of Bowden, George
>Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2015 9:44 AM
>To:
>'iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org<mailto:'iotivity-dev at
>lists.iotivity.org>'
>Cc: isg at lists.iotivity.org<mailto:isg at lists.iotivity.org>
>Subject: Re: [dev] CA and master merge status update
>
>Congratulations to all who contributed to completing this effort ? it?s
>certainly been a long awaited milestone on the path to IoTivity 1.0
>release!
>
>-- George
>
>
>From:
>iotivity-dev-bounces at lists.iotivity.org<mailto:iotivity-dev-bounces at
>lists.
>iotivity.org> [mailto:iotivity-dev-bounces at lists.iotivity.org] On Behalf
>Of Kesavan, Vijay S
>Sent: Friday, April 10, 2015 2:07 PM
>To:
>'iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org<mailto:'iotivity-dev at
>lists.iotivity.org>'
>Subject: [dev] CA and master merge status update
>
>All,
>
>The CA branch has been merged to master. Please make a note of the
>following:
>
>
>1. Merge process had several conflicts and it is possible that some
>resolutions might not have the intended behavior. Please re-run your
>applications/services and in case of issues, submit new patches. If you
>need to refer to the pre-merge state, the commit IDs of the roots of the
>two branches are CA: 8c3d005c76871cdcb238343e2563bdbfd6a7ee59; master:
>af9f5813db40c69283b1d25e3aeade2924e2022e
>
>2. In the ?service? directory the following applications did not build
>due to link errors and are currently disabled from the build:
>HeightSensorApp; WeightSensorApp; THSensorApp; THSensorApp1.
>
>3. On Arduino the SimpleClientServer/ocserver application did not build
>and has been disabled.
>
>Items 2 and 3 above will be addressed next week.
>
>Since the merge process is complete, all regular operations on master
>branch can resume.
>
>Next week the maintainer, Pat, will provide direction on future
>operations on CA branch.
>
>Thank you!
>--Vijay
>
>
>From: Kesavan, Vijay S
>Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2015 5:41 PM
>To:
>iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org<mailto:iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org>
>Subject: CA and master merge underway - do NOT push changesets to CA
>branch
>
>All,
>
>The merge of CA branch to master is currently underway, so we strongly
>suggest not posting new changesets to CA branch.
>
>On master, maintainers/sub-maintainers should not merge changesets until
>further announcement on the merge process.
>
>Thank you for your co-operation.
>
>Regards,
>--Vijay
>
