airavata-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Saminda Wijeratne <samin...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Suggestions for upcoming releases
Date Mon, 30 Sep 2013 19:42:14 GMT
zip is a utility supported in Windows by default. tar is a utility
supported by Unix like systems by default as I know.

Also I think the problem here is not having both zip or tar. But a single
binary being over 100MB.


On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Lahiru Gunathilake <glahiru@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I think if we have an issue with size, we can just release the real
> production pack with tomcat, no embedded version ? The reason we did
> embedded version was people can quickly download and test it but I think if
> we pack with tomcat it won't be too hard for people to test and play with
> it.
>
> And I am +1 for Supun's idea, not to release both the zip and tar.
>
> WDYT ?
>
> Lahiru
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka <
> shameerainfo@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Marlon,
>>
>> I would like to add my thought on versionning here, Please see my comment
>> inline.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Marlon Pierce <marpierc@iu.edu> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> 0.91 is a real number and it indicates also our intention to release 1.0
>>> in the near future.  As for GSOC contributions, I would favor having the
>>> GSOC participants take the lead on any integration, testing, etc with the
>>> trunk.
>>>
>>
>> According to the versionning strategy 0.91 should be a patch release of
>> 0.9 release. Therefore it is kind of misleading IMO. So i am +1 for 0.10
>> instead of 0.91.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Shameera.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Marlon
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/30/13 11:04 AM, Amila Jayasekara wrote:
>>> > On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Marlon Pierce <marpierc@iu.edu><marpierc@iu.edu>wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> > I'd be concerned about the quality of production testing for releasese
>>> > if we just include an embedded server.  I think Rave hit this
>>> > problem--everyone tested the simplified version packaged for the
>>> > release, but there were a lot bugs and other problems that appeared
>>> when
>>> > trying to use it in a more realistic deployment.
>>> >
>>> > I think it is better to come up with a packaging strategy that is
>>> simple
>>> > enough for testing but also reasonably realistic.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > > +1. I am also negative to only release server distribution. Most of
>>> the
>>> > > real deployment scenarios use a separate web server to deploy
>>> Airavata.
>>> > > Further certain functionalities cannot be tested at stand alone
>>> version.
>>> > > (E.g :- credential store). Therefore we should keep the war
>>> distribution.
>>> >
>>> > > Anyhow there is a blocking issue [1] for the release related to
>>> > > distribution size. So we must find a solution for this. (Best thing
>>> is to
>>> > > unify war distributions and get rid of duplicate jars)
>>> >
>>> > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRAVATA-922
>>> >
>>> > > Saminda had been making changes to REST API to incorporate workflow
>>> > > execution. Are we planning to make that change available in this
>>> release ?
>>> > > If so we can get rid of some of SOAP based services. (If this is
>>> taking
>>> > > place we can unify wars also). Saminda please give feedback on this.
>>> >
>>> > > Also what about code we inherit from GSOC project ? Are we planning
>>> to
>>> > > incorporate them to release ?
>>> >
>>> > > Further for the upcoming release it will be better if we do not
>>> include
>>> > > many features. Because there are couple of lingering Jira tickets
>>> which we
>>> > > have been postponing. Its better to fix some of those in hackathon
>>> mode
>>> > > before the release.
>>> >
>>> > > @Marlon : Any particular reason why you prefer 0.91 rather than 0.10
>>> ?
>>> > > (0.10 is what we have assigned right now)
>>> >
>>> > > Thanks
>>> > > Thejaka Amila
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Marlon
>>> >
>>> > On 9/30/13 10:30 AM, Raminder Singh wrote:
>>> > >>> Problem is not releasing both tar and zip. Problem is size
of the
>>> war
>>> > distribution file which contain
>>> > 2 war files (airavata-server.war and airavata-registry.war). Both the
>>> > war files have lib jars and increase its size more than 100MB. Apache
>>> > limit of 100MB is per file. I think we should only release tar and zip
>>> > with embedded server to get started. Creating and deploying of WARs can
>>> > be documented for production users. WDYT?
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> Thanks
>>> > >>> Raminder
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> On Sep 30, 2013, at 10:02 AM, Supun Kamburugamuva
>>> <supun06@gmail.com> <supun06@gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>> I've noticed you are releasing both a tar and a zip for
all the
>>> > distribution artifacts. I've seen lot of people only releasing a zip or
>>> > a tar and not both.
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> Thanks,
>>> > >>>> Supun..
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Saminda Wijeratne
>>> > <samindaw@gmail.com> <samindaw@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > >>>> reducing the release footprint should also be a priority
IMO.
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 12:07 PM, Raminder Singh
>>> <rsandhu1@gmail.com> <rsandhu1@gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> > >>>> Airavata 0.9 is released now and Marlon mentioned a timeline
for
>>> 1.0
>>> > is Mid Nov. How do we want to handle next release?
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> Some of the features required for the projects i work with
are:
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> GSISSH Provider
>>> > >>>> Async execution of Applications and implement your own
monitor.
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> Lets discuss a timeline and plan for next release and as
well as
>>> for
>>> > 1.0.
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> Thanks
>>> > >>>> Raminder
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> On Sep 13, 2013, at 3:06 PM, Marlon Pierce <marpierc@iu.edu><marpierc@iu.edu>wrote:
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>> Hi all--
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> Airavata 0.9 is pending, we also would like to have
1.0 in time
>>> for
>>> > >>>>> Supercomputing 2013 (November 15th), and we have been
trying to
>>> get
>>> > down
>>> > >>>>> to ~6 week releases.  We have 9 weeks until SC13.
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> I suggest we do the following:
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> * Get 0.9 out over the next couple of days. There are
no blocking
>>> > issues.
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> * Define 0.91 or 0.10 release next week and target
completion in
>>> 4 for
>>> > >>>>> ~October 11th.
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> * Define and complete 1.0 release for November 15th.
 The
>>> primary goal
>>> > >>>>> for 1.0 is to have the API stable.
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> Marlon
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> --
>>> > >>>> Supun Kamburugamuva
>>> > >>>> Member, Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org
>>> > >>>> E-mail: supun06@gmail.com;  Mobile: +1 812 369 6762
>>> > >>>> Blog: http://supunk.blogspot.com
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin)
>>> Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
>>> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>>>
>>> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSSZmZAAoJEOEgD2XReDo5PyMH/0sBqjLWZDAw2hEWbE41VvVC
>>> Jb5VLpgy6iBAqT8nJxRCy1tO22tB/t0SYOT1NVV/LaUMFrqNM1/lCK8ru251Gf4/
>>> a0c4nCMeR+ItLo6uCLSfIC90plNmc2NOHbmiFGNbZCtSfVEnDVo86oVF/OxahLZs
>>> 9csQ6bkeZWhNCm98WRDEhGQzSaHpu7qyyL9IGO2spOwPafDQvpiP7jf587h15vSj
>>> LfK2Fcf00X8ZIgJBQD5E9//iiBCDQyFW/9WQWV3Mz2UWKJktkA6wMJG2JO5PKcxK
>>> Haj4zyxaYfioN3k+CTyce+5+UyK0tr80qwvHzHsIc81ZrfViaCwZ2Ds6VlJt9qs=
>>> =m+hz
>>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>> Shameera Rathnayaka.
>>
>> email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
>> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> System Analyst Programmer
> PTI Lab
> Indiana University
>

Mime
View raw message