MIBA 2.0.0 : what's next ?
Hi guys, now that we got this damn release done, what will we do next ? There are many things we still have to take care of : - the MINA new site is still pending, waiting for some love (http://mina.apache.org/mina2/) - the doco is also lagging a lot, and we may want to improve it - more important, IMO, is the next version. Should we create an branch for 2.0.1 immediately, and let trunk be 3.0 ? wdyt ? -- Regards, Cordialement, Emmanuel Lécharny www.iktek.com
Re: MIBA 2.0.0 : what's next ?
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: > Hi guys, > > now that we got this damn release done, what will we do next ? > > There are many things we still have to take care of : > - the MINA new site is still pending, waiting for some love > (http://mina.apache.org/mina2/) +1, anything specific that we must take on priority > - the doco is also lagging a lot, and we may want to improve it site or javadoc? > - more important, IMO, is the next version. Should we create an branch for > 2.0.1 immediately, and let trunk be 3.0 ? +1, but what do we do about 3.0 branch and the work that we did there? > > wdyt ? A BIG THANKS again for the release :) -- thanks ashish
Re: MIBA 2.0.0 : what's next ?
On 9/27/10 5:50 PM, Ashish wrote: On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: Hi guys, now that we got this damn release done, what will we do next ? There are many things we still have to take care of : - the MINA new site is still pending, waiting for some love (http://mina.apache.org/mina2/) +1, anything specific that we must take on priority We must move all the old MINA site pages to MINA2 new site. - the doco is also lagging a lot, and we may want to improve it site or javadoc? Both :) We may go for a docstyle generated site here. - more important, IMO, is the next version. Should we create an branch for 2.0.1 immediately, and let trunk be 3.0 ? +1, but what do we do about 3.0 branch and the work that we did there? I would suggest that we branch trunk as it is, to create a 2.0.1 branch (which will become the working trunk for 2.0.0 and upper), and move what we did in the 3.0 branch into trunk. -- Regards, Cordialement, Emmanuel Lécharny www.iktek.com
Re: MIBA 2.0.0 : what's next ?
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:37 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote: > On 9/27/10 5:50 PM, Ashish wrote: >> >> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi guys, >>> >>> now that we got this damn release done, what will we do next ? >>> >>> There are many things we still have to take care of : >>> - the MINA new site is still pending, waiting for some love >>> (http://mina.apache.org/mina2/) >> >> +1, anything specific that we must take on priority > > We must move all the old MINA site pages to MINA2 new site. hmmm.. AFAIK we moved all :), anything missing? >>> >>> - the doco is also lagging a lot, and we may want to improve it >> >> site or javadoc? > > Both :) Ahh... +1 > > We may go for a docstyle generated site here. >>> >>> - more important, IMO, is the next version. Should we create an branch >>> for >>> 2.0.1 immediately, and let trunk be 3.0 ? >> >> +1, but what do we do about 3.0 branch and the work that we did there? > > I would suggest that we branch trunk as it is, to create a 2.0.1 branch > (which will become the working trunk for 2.0.0 and upper), and move what we > did in the 3.0 branch into trunk. +1, Got that :) -- thanks ashish Blog: http://www.ashishpaliwal.com/blog My Photo Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/ashishpaliwal
Re: MIBA 2.0.0 : what's next ?
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: > - more important, IMO, is the next version. Should we create an branch for > 2.0.1 immediately, and let trunk be 3.0 ? +1, create a mina-2.0.x branch and let trunk be 3.0 /niklas
Re: MIBA 2.0.0 : what's next ?
+1, create a mina-2.0.x branch and let trunk be 3.0. Also, what about all current bugs/feature requests in JIRA, should we move them to 3.0? I see that there a a bunch of JIRA entries currently in as 2.0.1, but should we make sure that they should be 2.0.1 and not 3.0? ...just my $.02 On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: > Hi guys, > > now that we got this damn release done, what will we do next ? > > There are many things we still have to take care of : > - the MINA new site is still pending, waiting for some love > (http://mina.apache.org/mina2/) > - the doco is also lagging a lot, and we may want to improve it > - more important, IMO, is the next version. Should we create an branch for > 2.0.1 immediately, and let trunk be 3.0 ? > > wdyt ? > > -- > Regards, > Cordialement, > Emmanuel Lécharny > www.iktek.com > >
Re: MIBA 2.0.0 : what's next ?
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Mark Webb wrote: > +1, create a mina-2.0.x branch and let trunk be 3.0. Also, what about > all current bugs/feature requests in JIRA, should we move them to 3.0? > I see that there a a bunch of JIRA entries currently in as 2.0.1, but > should we make sure that they should be 2.0.1 and not 3.0? > > I'd do as many simple point bug fix releases in 2.0.x branch with micro-version increments and try to merge the fix into the 3.0 at the same time. -- Alex Karasulu My Blog :: http://www.jroller.com/akarasulu/ Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org Apache MINA :: http://mina.apache.org To set up a meeting with me: http://tungle.me/AlexKarasulu
Re: MIBA 2.0.0 : what's next ?
On 9/28/10 11:21 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote: On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Mark Webb wrote: +1, create a mina-2.0.x branch and let trunk be 3.0. Also, what about all current bugs/feature requests in JIRA, should we move them to 3.0? I see that there a a bunch of JIRA entries currently in as 2.0.1, but should we make sure that they should be 2.0.1 and not 3.0? I'd do as many simple point bug fix releases in 2.0.x branch with micro-version increments and try to merge the fix into the 3.0 at the same time. I'm afraid that MINA 3.0 will be a total rewrite, with no way to get fixes from 2.0... I consider 2.0 as dead wood at this point. -- Regards, Cordialement, Emmanuel Lécharny www.iktek.com
Re: MIBA 2.0.0 : what's next ?
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: > On 9/28/10 11:21 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote: >> >> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Mark Webb wrote: >> >>> +1, create a mina-2.0.x branch and let trunk be 3.0. Also, what about >>> all current bugs/feature requests in JIRA, should we move them to 3.0? >>> I see that there a a bunch of JIRA entries currently in as 2.0.1, but >>> should we make sure that they should be 2.0.1 and not 3.0? >>> >>> >> I'd do as many simple point bug fix releases in 2.0.x branch with >> micro-version increments and try to merge the fix into the 3.0 at the same >> time. > > I'm afraid that MINA 3.0 will be a total rewrite, with no way to get fixes > from 2.0... I consider 2.0 as dead wood at this point. Agreed ! But what's the roadmap for 2.0.x, meaning do we fix all the JIRA's open there?
Re: MIBA 2.0.0 : what's next ?
On 9/28/10 11:54 AM, Ashish wrote: On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: On 9/28/10 11:21 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote: On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Mark Webbwrote: +1, create a mina-2.0.x branch and let trunk be 3.0. Also, what about all current bugs/feature requests in JIRA, should we move them to 3.0? I see that there a a bunch of JIRA entries currently in as 2.0.1, but should we make sure that they should be 2.0.1 and not 3.0? I'd do as many simple point bug fix releases in 2.0.x branch with micro-version increments and try to merge the fix into the 3.0 at the same time. I'm afraid that MINA 3.0 will be a total rewrite, with no way to get fixes from 2.0... I consider 2.0 as dead wood at this point. Agreed ! But what's the roadmap for 2.0.x, meaning do we fix all the JIRA's open there? 2.0.x will be bug fix releases., so yes, opened JIRA will apply on this branch. -- Regards, Cordialement, Emmanuel Lécharny www.iktek.com
Re: MIBA 2.0.0 : what's next ?
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: > On 9/28/10 11:21 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Mark Webb wrote: >> >> +1, create a mina-2.0.x branch and let trunk be 3.0. Also, what about >>> all current bugs/feature requests in JIRA, should we move them to 3.0? >>> I see that there a a bunch of JIRA entries currently in as 2.0.1, but >>> should we make sure that they should be 2.0.1 and not 3.0? >>> >>> >>> I'd do as many simple point bug fix releases in 2.0.x branch with >> micro-version increments and try to merge the fix into the 3.0 at the same >> time. >> > I'm afraid that MINA 3.0 will be a total rewrite, with no way to get fixes > from 2.0... I consider 2.0 as dead wood at this point. Hahaha is this a reference to the crusty "Norwegian Wood" codename that someone gave it a while back? Regardless yeah sounds like it. No worries then. But why bother forking a branch instead just move the current 2.0 trunk to 2.0 branch and start writing fresh new code? -- Alex Karasulu My Blog :: http://www.jroller.com/akarasulu/ Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org Apache MINA :: http://mina.apache.org To set up a meeting with me: http://tungle.me/AlexKarasulu
Re: MIBA 2.0.0 : what's next ?
On 9/28/10 4:36 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote: I'm afraid that MINA 3.0 will be a total rewrite, with no way to get fixes from 2.0... I consider 2.0 as dead wood at this point. Hahaha is this a reference to the crusty "Norwegian Wood" codename that someone gave it a while back? Not even close to that ! It's just a coincidence... Regardless yeah sounds like it. No worries then. But why bother forking a branch instead just move the current 2.0 trunk to 2.0 branch and start writing fresh new code? We already have a 2.0 branch. May be we will remove what we have in trunk and move the 3.0 branch to trunk, now that the 2.0.1 branch has been created. -- Regards, Cordialement, Emmanuel Lécharny www.iktek.com
Re: MIBA 2.0.0 : what's next ?
I assume the API will be backwards compatible though, right? On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:38 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote: > On 9/28/10 4:36 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote: >>> >>> I'm afraid that MINA 3.0 will be a total rewrite, with no way to get >>> fixes >>> from 2.0... I consider 2.0 as dead wood at this point. >> >> Hahaha is this a reference to the crusty "Norwegian Wood" codename that >> someone gave it a while back? > > Not even close to that ! It's just a coincidence... >> >> Regardless yeah sounds like it. No worries then. But why bother forking a >> branch instead just move the current 2.0 trunk to 2.0 branch and start >> writing fresh new code? > > We already have a 2.0 branch. May be we will remove what we have in trunk > and move the 3.0 branch to trunk, now that the 2.0.1 branch has been > created. > > > -- > Regards, > Cordialement, > Emmanuel Lécharny > www.iktek.com > >
Re: MIBA 2.0.0 : what's next ?
On 9/29/10 3:53 PM, Mark Webb wrote: I assume the API will be backwards compatible though, right? Right, as much as we can, but if we can't we should absolutely provide some clear and documented path for migration. -- Regards, Cordialement, Emmanuel Lécharny www.iktek.com
