El lun, 29-12-2008 a las 09:41 -0800, Brian McCallister escribió: > On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 2:58 PM, Henning Schmiedehausen > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Both PHP and Java depend on the same Javascript feature code. Apart from > > that, I agree. > > > > I'd appreciate from both a participatory and a PR point of View a release > > past Jan 1st. > > Actually, considering the level of interest in Shindig, we should > consider doing a press release -- if there are no objections, I'll > start chatting with the PRC about it. They need about a two week lead > time generally to get all ducks in a row (mostly in terms of getting > us to get them the info they need :-) > > I'm happy to coordinate with the PRC, but we should have additional > folks available for followup contacts (typically this will be press > folks). >
I am in the prc, and read usually the lists there and press@, so I'll keep an eye into the press release and also into the reactions, in order to redirect requests towards here, etc. Regards, and Happy New Year to everybody Santiago, who is way less involved here as of late... > -Brian > > > > > Von meinem iPhone gesendet > > > > Am Dec 27, 2008 um 22:02 schrieb "Brian McCallister" <[email protected]>: > > > >> On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 8:30 PM, Chris Chabot <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hey guys, > >>> > >>> I just wanted to ping the list and see what action items are still open > >>> before we can try to roll the actual release tar balls. > >>> > >>> On the PHP side I've put in some long days before we thought we would be > >>> releasing, so that's been ready and waiting ever since, so no reasons > >>> there > >>> to block the release that i'm aware of. > >> > >> Is there any reason to bind the PHP impl to the Java impl for releases? > >> > >> I see none. > >> > >>> > >>> As far as i'm aware much of the maven release procedure has been > >>> addressed > >>> (but it's all voodoo for me, so feel free to correct me), there's some > >>> discussion ongoing still about the release package names though we seem > >>> to > >>> have an majority prefering the shindig-{java,php} approach in some form > >>> or > >>> another; And the hard coded path problem, while it is a nice to have > >>> doesn't > >>> seem like a blocking issue to me personally with a rewrite jetty solution > >>> suggested. > >>> > >>> That leaves the xml output of some internal classes under discussion, > >>> though > >>> Kevin very much gave the impression there that that was not part of the > >>> contract of those classes, so not something we want to overhaul before we > >>> do > >>> a 1.0 release. There's the issue of the jslint output warnings, and some > >>> RAT > >>> warnings (which i send an inquery about to try to find out what the right > >>> approach is there, but haven't recieved a reply on yet). > >>> > >>> Most people will be taking a xmas break after the end of this week (if > >>> not > >>> already), so if there are substantial action items still open i guess > >>> we'll > >>> have to be realistic and shoot for jan 2009. > >>> > >>> Is there anything missing from this summary? And do we have any idea of > >>> when > >>> we can fix and/or put these issues to rest? > >>> > >>> There's a lot of people who would *love* to have a stable release they > >>> can > >>> work with, so lets not forget about them > >>> > >>> -- Chris > >>> > >
