chemistry-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gabriele Columbro <gabri...@apache.org>
Subject Re: TLP releases
Date Fri, 25 Feb 2011 17:06:41 GMT
Hi guys,
I'm starting works with the 0.3.0 next release, see my comments below:

On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Florian Müller <
florian.mueller@alfresco.com> wrote:

> Looks like we want and can do new releases...
>
>
> Re OpenCMIS release:
> I think we should do a release similar to 0.2 and deal with the
> documentation later in 0.4. (See below.)
> @Gab: Would you drive that?
>

Yep, I edited https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CMIS-305 to gather all
the build/release updates to do for a TLP release. I should be able to fix
today or Monday latest.

I was also thinking to give a try to the build with Maven3. I opened an
improvement (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CMIS-322) but not
scheduled it yet, it's definitely *not* for 0.3.0.

<snip/>

>
> Re documentation (of OpenCMIS):
> The documentation is our weak point. I think we should go for a more
> structured approach.
> How about coming up with a new documentation outline? That would help us
> identifying the gaps and we can divide the work amongst us. Opinions?
>
> With the move to the Apache CMS, the website and therefore all our
> documentation pages are now in SVN.
> We don't actually need to grab it from the website anymore. We can check it
> out, apply a template (which need not to be the website template) and
> generate the documentation as part of the release.
>

I created a documentation design page in staging

http://chemistry.staging.apache.org/java/documentation-lifecycle.html

which just waits for your edits and suggestions. Would be great if some can
consolidate there also the new outline Florian suggest, if we go down that
path.

I proposed there a possible simplification / alignment of the documentation
release, by using per version documentation snapshots (since Apache CMS is
SVN).
When we get to an agreement there we can open an issue and schedule it
(maybe 0.4.0?).


>
> Re tests:
> Yes, we have a lot of tests but they are spread. I agree we should
> consolidate them.
> Similar to the documentation, I think we need a plan and objectives. Does
> somebody feel strongly enough about this to work on a proposal?
>

I think this could be better handled by the Maven site build, which is
supposed to aggregate all tests in one or few reachable pages.

BTW in this arena test reports were completely broken for 0.2.0-incubating
so I'll try to quickly fix this (
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CMIS-323) for 0.3.0 or move it to
0.4.0.


>
>
> Re fulltext query parser:
> I agree.
> @Jens: Do we have a JIRA issue for that? Would you take that? You know the
> parser better than most of us...
>
>
> Re DotCMIS:
> All operations are implemented and basic tests are working against Alfresco
> and IBM FileNet. But the test coverage isn't great yet.
> We could either cut a release now and fix potential bugs later ("release
> early, release often") or do more testing and delay the first release.
> Opinions?
>
>
> Re roadmap:
> I think we should have one. :)
> In particular, we have to think about CMIS 1.1. For example, we could
> integrate the Browser Binding code now without endangering CMIS 1.0
> compatibility.
> Any takers? Would JIRA be a good tool to maintain a roadmap?
>

I think the Jira roadmap [1] works nicely if we properly use the "fix for"
field.

But we 1st need to do a re-factoring which was already discussed in the list
in the past, i.e. *having separate Jira projects for the different Chemistry
subprojects*.

This will allow single projects to use Jira versions and components in the
best way. And then we could aggregate subprojects roadmaps in a main Roadmap
CMS page in the public site.

WDYT? Shall we follow up this request for Jira projects for cmis-php-lib,
cmislib and dotCMIS?


Eager to hear your thoughts,
Gab


[1]
https://issues.apache.org/jira/brows/CMIS#selectedTab=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.project%3Aroadmap-panel

>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Florian
>
>
> On 23/02/2011 13:38, Gabriele Columbro wrote:
> > Hi,
> > thanks for getting this started.
> >
> >  From a purely release/packaging standpoint it should be easy to upgrade
> to a
> > TLP release (removing version suffix and incubator notices in artifacts +
> > change some quite trivial POM information).
> >
> > I suggest we open a more detailed issue in JIRA for that. I can take care
> of
> > that and even shoot for a release in the next weeks.
> >
> > My only general concern still open on our releases is the documentation
> > lifecycle, as I'm unsure of the happy coexistence (and coherence in a
> > release package) of generated Maven Docs, the new Apache CMS pages (or
> old
> > wiki pages) and the chemistry-docs.zip package we release (which wgets
> the
> > current snapshot of online docs and adds freshly generated javadocs).
>  But
> > maybe it's something that can wait for a 1.0. WDYT?
> >
> > I agree with Stephan that a roadmap is a good idea.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Gab
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Klevenz, Stephan
> > <stephan.klevenz@sap.com>wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> for a 0.3.0 as an 'as is' release just without the incubation label.
> ASAP.
> >>
> >> Then we could also think about a roadmap to 1.0 release which could
> include
> >> further minor releases and major code changes.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Stephan
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Florian Müller [mailto:florian.mueller@alfresco.com]
> >> Sent: Mittwoch, 23. Februar 2011 13:05
> >> To: dev@chemistry.apache.org
> >> Subject: TLP releases
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> We are ticking off more and more tasks that are related to the
> graduation.
> >> But there is still one big open topic: TLP releases
> >>
> >> When do we think can and should we release OpenCMIS and cmislib without
> >> "incubating" label?
> >>
> >> Can we just take the current code and release it? There shouldn't be too
> >> many changes since the last releases.
> >> Even though the release processes are now slightly different and we have
> to
> >> adjust the release packages a bit, it shouldn't take too long to prepare
> the
> >> releases.
> >>
> >> Opinions?
> >>
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Florian
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Eng. Gabriele Columbro
> Open source and ECM Architect
> Alfresco Ltd. - http://www.alfresco.com
> -----------------------------------------
> http://twitter.com/#!/mindthegabz
> -----------------------------------------
> "Keyboard not found.
>  Press F1 to continue"
> ----------------------------------------
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message