airavata-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Milinda Pathirage <milinda.pathir...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Suggestions for upcoming releases
Date Wed, 02 Oct 2013 12:44:11 GMT
If Airavata supports windows zip distribution should be there. And I think
that we shouldn't worry about the size only because we can't upload it to
Apache release site. We can try dependency exclusions in modules where we
don't have any exclusions.

Thanks,
Milinda


On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Shameera Rathnayaka <shameerainfo@gmail.com
> wrote:

> Hi Danushka,
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:37 PM, Danushka Menikkumbura <
> danushka.menikkumbura@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Also a patch releases for 0.9 should be 0.9.1, 0.9.2, ... IMO.
>>
>
> yes this is the way i like too, because it is more clear.  but it can be
> 0.91,0.92 see[1]
>
> Thanks,
> Shameera.
>
> [1]
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning#Incrementing_sequences
>
>
>> Thanks,
>> Danushka
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:39 PM, Marlon Pierce <marpierc@iu.edu> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> Checking the semantic versioning site (semver.org) again, the increment
>>> 0.10 is preferred.  Since we want to have time-driven (rather than
>>> feature-driven) releases, we will hit this again every 10 patch releases.
>>> We don't want a future patch release to be 1.1.91--it should be 1.1.10.
>>>
>>> So I'm +1 for 0.10.
>>>
>>>
>>> Marlon
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/30/13 12:19 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka 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><marpierc@iu.edu>wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> > 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>
>>> <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> <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> <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> <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>
>>> <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/
>>>
>>> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSSbA+AAoJEOEgD2XReDo5TAkIAM50ojm//tzKgIFpzgYdLQTD
>>> aRX8iuLpqL6jfXQmRtIW4jpjRK3xHhSkkCGqbK+XsYxbeyM0QHK2myyGKIGnhDfJ
>>> LQeOsFP6PbEN8lrUg2PPHezsqd7jEtUJ7ElJj7nAZvO7vIWXv/s6j9S8L3XCBgFe
>>> 7tbi0fki5SP76B95sdbOfD+aP++1z8vlciDWDfA1arjeZNqTwIv1feSZZqb5+Iof
>>> AAWCPMQ0sB+Fhj2yJ0++DWkX/ADeCQ67zevLVfymDW33WGYdxB9jf5OyTxeH/T4Y
>>> 013dRi8bX4nUQOMeKrL4WEUZ8Ap3xhRriqnCLozc8bqsHIAVGk9a4AR2PqlHfdg=
>>> =YETR
>>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Shameera Rathnayaka.
>
> email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
>



-- 
Milinda Pathirage
PhD Student Indiana University, Bloomington;
E-mail: milinda.pathirage@gmail.com
Web: http://mpathirage.com
Blog: http://blog.mpathirage.com

Mime
View raw message