Re: SDO dependencies for SCA 1.0 release, was Fwd: SCA 1.0 release (was Re: Release management for next release, was: SCA 0.92 release?
Great, so looks like we would need a DAS release compatible with SDO 1.0 in order to include any SCA/DAS integration in the SCA 1.0 release. I'll try to get that done, by cutting a branch and working on a DAS release sometime this week. Please let me know if there is any changes in plan. On 8/28/07, kelvin goodson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are no plans in place yet for the next SDO release. 1.0-incubating would seem the obvious choice. Kelvin. On 28/08/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That would be my guess unless there's a newer SDO release by then but i've not seen any mention of that in the SDO emails. ...ant On 8/27/07, Luciano Resende [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What are you guys thinking about SDO requirements for SCA 1.0 release ? SDO 1.0-incubating ? -- Forwarded message -- From: Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Aug 27, 2007 2:58 AM Subject: Re: SCA 1.0 release (was Re: Release management for next release, was: SCA 0.92 release? To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 8/27/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 8/9/07, Venkata Krishnan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip - Post 0.95, maybe a couple of weeks after the release, we'd cut another branch and head with that for 1.0 release. Being a 1.0 release, we prob. need a branch early as that so that we can whet the things we are targetting for the release. This seems like a really good idea to me. The 0.99 release has again shown that it always takes at least a couple of RCs to discover and resolve regressions caused by last minute changes and to polish up the samples, and for 1.0 we're all likely to be a bit more pedantic about readme and sample problems. How about aiming for a 1.0 branch and RC1 around the 14th of September? That gives 3 weeks from now for getting things ready and then two weeks which should enough for 2 or 3 RCs and voting and still get a 1.0in September. I've created a 1.0 JIRA version and started moving into there JIRAs i'd like to try to get done for 1.0 : http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=truemode=hidesorter/order=DESCsorter/field=priorityresolution=-1pid=12310210fixfor=12312698 One thing that would be good to do now while they're fresh in our minds is for people to commit fixes to trunk for all the sample and readme issues they reported in the 0.99 review so they don't get forgotten till 1.0review. ...ant +1 from me. I think we are going to need the extra time to fix the many small things we found this time round. Simon -- Luciano Resende Apache Tuscany Committer http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://lresende.blogspot.com/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Luciano Resende Apache Tuscany Committer http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://lresende.blogspot.com/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SDO dependencies for SCA 1.0 release, was Fwd: SCA 1.0 release (was Re: Release management for next release, was: SCA 0.92 release?
That would be my guess unless there's a newer SDO release by then but i've not seen any mention of that in the SDO emails. ...ant On 8/27/07, Luciano Resende [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What are you guys thinking about SDO requirements for SCA 1.0 release ? SDO 1.0-incubating ? -- Forwarded message -- From: Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Aug 27, 2007 2:58 AM Subject: Re: SCA 1.0 release (was Re: Release management for next release, was: SCA 0.92 release? To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 8/27/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 8/9/07, Venkata Krishnan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip - Post 0.95, maybe a couple of weeks after the release, we'd cut another branch and head with that for 1.0 release. Being a 1.0 release, we prob. need a branch early as that so that we can whet the things we are targetting for the release. This seems like a really good idea to me. The 0.99 release has again shown that it always takes at least a couple of RCs to discover and resolve regressions caused by last minute changes and to polish up the samples, and for 1.0 we're all likely to be a bit more pedantic about readme and sample problems. How about aiming for a 1.0 branch and RC1 around the 14th of September? That gives 3 weeks from now for getting things ready and then two weeks which should enough for 2 or 3 RCs and voting and still get a 1.0in September. I've created a 1.0 JIRA version and started moving into there JIRAs i'd like to try to get done for 1.0 : http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=truemode=hidesorter/order=DESCsorter/field=priorityresolution=-1pid=12310210fixfor=12312698 One thing that would be good to do now while they're fresh in our minds is for people to commit fixes to trunk for all the sample and readme issues they reported in the 0.99 review so they don't get forgotten till 1.0review. ...ant +1 from me. I think we are going to need the extra time to fix the many small things we found this time round. Simon -- Luciano Resende Apache Tuscany Committer http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://lresende.blogspot.com/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SDO dependencies for SCA 1.0 release, was Fwd: SCA 1.0 release (was Re: Release management for next release, was: SCA 0.92 release?
There are no plans in place yet for the next SDO release. 1.0-incubating would seem the obvious choice. Kelvin. On 28/08/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That would be my guess unless there's a newer SDO release by then but i've not seen any mention of that in the SDO emails. ...ant On 8/27/07, Luciano Resende [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What are you guys thinking about SDO requirements for SCA 1.0 release ? SDO 1.0-incubating ? -- Forwarded message -- From: Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Aug 27, 2007 2:58 AM Subject: Re: SCA 1.0 release (was Re: Release management for next release, was: SCA 0.92 release? To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 8/27/07, ant elder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 8/9/07, Venkata Krishnan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip - Post 0.95, maybe a couple of weeks after the release, we'd cut another branch and head with that for 1.0 release. Being a 1.0 release, we prob. need a branch early as that so that we can whet the things we are targetting for the release. This seems like a really good idea to me. The 0.99 release has again shown that it always takes at least a couple of RCs to discover and resolve regressions caused by last minute changes and to polish up the samples, and for 1.0 we're all likely to be a bit more pedantic about readme and sample problems. How about aiming for a 1.0 branch and RC1 around the 14th of September? That gives 3 weeks from now for getting things ready and then two weeks which should enough for 2 or 3 RCs and voting and still get a 1.0in September. I've created a 1.0 JIRA version and started moving into there JIRAs i'd like to try to get done for 1.0 : http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=truemode=hidesorter/order=DESCsorter/field=priorityresolution=-1pid=12310210fixfor=12312698 One thing that would be good to do now while they're fresh in our minds is for people to commit fixes to trunk for all the sample and readme issues they reported in the 0.99 review so they don't get forgotten till 1.0review. ...ant +1 from me. I think we are going to need the extra time to fix the many small things we found this time round. Simon -- Luciano Resende Apache Tuscany Committer http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://lresende.blogspot.com/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
