Just one more point on a 1.0.0 release. The code base could really benefit from a quick scan of all "catch" clauses to see what we are doing with exceptions. For example, the server TokenPreAuth contains the following:
} catch (FileNotFoundException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } catch (Exception e) { e.printStackTrace(); } We should either be logging exceptions properly or propagating them accordingly. Colm. On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 2:01 PM, Colm O hEigeartaigh <cohei...@apache.org> wrote: > +1 for a release. However, I believe there to be a security issue with > anonymous pkinit as per my recent mail, so I'd like this to be addressed in > the release first. > > Colm. > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny <elecha...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Le 27/07/16 à 10:54, Zheng, Kai a écrit : >> > Maybe we could release this version as 1.0.0 directly? Any concern? I >> don't see any. We could claim the authorization feature and remote kadmin >> support as [EXPERIMENTAL]. >> > >> > Sorry too busy recently and don't have bandwidth on this. Hope it can >> move forward anyway. >> >> That's really up to you ! If there were no complain with the latest RC, >> then, yes, delivering a 1.0 would totally make sense. >> >> FTR, in the past, we had a convoluted versionning pattern at Directory >> for projects, with numerous milestones. This was plain stupid. I really >> like the way Chrome and Firefox are released those days, with a quick >> incremental version : each new features added deserve a separate >> version, with some potential minor versions for urgent bug fixes. >> >> But this is something you have to discuss, my friends ;-) >> > > > > -- > Colm O hEigeartaigh > > Talend Community Coder > http://coders.talend.com > -- Colm O hEigeartaigh Talend Community Coder http://coders.talend.com