chemistry-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gavin Cornwell <gavin.cornw...@alfresco.com>
Subject Re: Commits to ObjectiveCMIS
Date Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:51:50 GMT
Hi Lukas,

I’ve found another bug (uploads do not cancel) that would be really good to be fixed before
we do the 0.3 release.

I’m testing a solution right now, can you please hold off the release until I’ve committed
the fix?

Regards,

Gavin



On 28 Mar 2014, at 08:29, Gavin Cornwell <gavin.cornwell@alfresco.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Sounds great, many thanks Lukas.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Gavin
> 
> 
> 
> On 28 Mar 2014, at 07:50, Gross, Lukas <lukas.gross@sap.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> We have some minor fixes on our side that I'm going to commit today.
>> I will take care of the 0.3 release next week.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Lukas
>> 
>> On 3/27/14 12:29 PM, "Gavin Cornwell" <gavin.cornwell@alfresco.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I have run through all the tests on our side and found a couple of minor
>>> issues that I addressed yesterday (project settings and a progress issue).
>>> 
>>> There is still an Xcode warning/suggestion on the project settings (when
>>> using Xcode 5.1) which caused a problem building with Xcode 5.0 so I’ve
>>> left them as they were for now. The 64 bit slice is being included in the
>>> binary so I think this will be fine for this release.
>>> 
>>> Unless you have a different opinion on the project settings I think we’re
>>> ready for the 0.3 release.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> Gavin
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 25 Mar 2014, at 15:24, Gavin Cornwell <gavin.cornwell@alfresco.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> There’s one more thing to check on our side before giving the green
>>>> light for 0.3, I will work on that tomorrow and let you know as soon as
>>>> I can.
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Gavin
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 25 Mar 2014, at 06:38, Gross, Lukas <lukas.gross@sap.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Alright then. Just give me you OK when everything is ready for 0.3 from
>>>>> your side. I will then do the release.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Whenever you are ready for the initial browser binding checkin please
>>>>> let
>>>>> me know so that we can have a look and discuss the further approach :)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Lukas
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 3/24/14 11:14 AM, "Gavin Cornwell" <gavin.cornwell@alfresco.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Sounds good to me, I just need to check here that there isn¹t anything
>>>>>> else required for 0.3, the guy I need to ask is beck from holiday
>>>>>> tomorrow so I¹ll send a response tomorrow if that¹s OK?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If you don¹t mind doing the release that is absolutely fine with
me
>>>>>> ;-)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regarding the browser binding, I created the branch over the weekend
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> have merged the work I did previously into that locally. There is
>>>>>> still
>>>>>> some work to do before I¹m happy doing an initial commit, but I
plan
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> doing that in the evenings this week so I should have something to
>>>>>> contribute soon.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Gavin
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 21 Mar 2014, at 16:46, Gross, Lukas <lukas.gross@sap.com>
wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Excellent thats also our opinion. However ACL write support is
not on
>>>>>>> our
>>>>>>> list for the next weeks, so I would rather do a release now and
then
>>>>>>> concentrate on Browser Binding.
>>>>>>> Do you want me to do the release? Please let me know how you
want to
>>>>>>> proceed.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Lukas
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 3/21/14 12:29 PM, "Gavin Cornwell" <gavin.cornwell@alfresco.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I think yes, we should target the 0.3 release without the
browser
>>>>>>>> binding.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> We will probably need a 0.3 release sooner than 3-4 months
(most
>>>>>>>> likely
>>>>>>>> in the next month) and I will only be able to work on the
browser
>>>>>>>> binding
>>>>>>>> as a background task in my spare time.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> My preference therefore would be to finish your ACL write
features
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> release that as 0.3 and then have a 0.4 release for the browser
>>>>>>>> binding
>>>>>>>> support.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> What do you think?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Gavin
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 20 Mar 2014, at 13:01, Gross, Lukas <lukas.gross@sap.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The main question is: Do we target a 0.3 release without
browser
>>>>>>>>> binding
>>>>>>>>> or do we plan to get browser binding done first. From
our side this
>>>>>>>>> depends on the timeframe in which we can get this done.
If we could
>>>>>>>>> get
>>>>>>>>> this done within lets say the next 2 to 3 months I would
prefer to
>>>>>>>>> bundle
>>>>>>>>> everything together and release 0.3. If you think we
need longer
>>>>>>>>> than
>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>> should consider moving browser binding to 0.4. However
we have a
>>>>>>>>> strong
>>>>>>>>> demand for browser binding and therefore plan to have
at least one
>>>>>>>>> person
>>>>>>>>> working full-time on this topic.
>>>>>>>>> The only other thing currently in our pipeline is write
support for
>>>>>>>>> ACLs.
>>>>>>>>> We recently committed the parser for read support however
write is
>>>>>>>>> still
>>>>>>>>> missing. We plan to do this also during the next weeks.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Lukas
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On 3/20/14 10:27 AM, "Gavin Cornwell" <gavin.cornwell@alfresco.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Excellent, a 0.3 release would also be really useful
for us too.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I would suggest doing a release sooner rather than
later, what
>>>>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>>>>> implementation tasks are there from your side that
would need to
>>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>> done
>>>>>>>>>> before 0.3?
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Gav
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On 20 Mar 2014, at 07:58, Gross, Lukas <lukas.gross@sap.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> I agree that it would be more consistent to have
only the request
>>>>>>>>>>> object
>>>>>>>>>>> to cancel a request. I will change our code to
use the request
>>>>>>>>>>> objects
>>>>>>>>>>> cancel method and then remove the stop parameter
from the
>>>>>>>>>>> library.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> We had problems using Google hangout in the past,
however we
>>>>>>>>>>> could
>>>>>>>>>>> give
>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>> another try. Just let me know when you have setup
the branch and
>>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>> schedule a session.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> We should also discuss the timeframe for the
upcoming
>>>>>>>>>>> implementation
>>>>>>>>>>> tasks
>>>>>>>>>>> so that we can plan the Objective CMIS 0.3 release.
We need this
>>>>>>>>>>> new
>>>>>>>>>>> release as early as possible so that we can get
an approval for
>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>> :)
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Lukas
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/19/14 10:21 PM, "Gavin Cornwell"
>>>>>>>>>>> <gavin.cornwell@alfresco.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> I do see your point about the stop parameter
being a common
>>>>>>>>>>>> paradigm
>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>> iOS, however, personally I would prefer that
we remove it,
>>>>>>>>>>>> especially
>>>>>>>>>>>> if
>>>>>>>>>>>> the request approach works. We then have
one consistent way to
>>>>>>>>>>>> cancel
>>>>>>>>>>>> operations across the whole library (the
parameter approach is
>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>> applicable to methods with progress).
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Great to hear you're also interested in the
browser binding. I
>>>>>>>>>>>> did
>>>>>>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>>>>>>> initial work a while ago so I need to sync
it with the recent
>>>>>>>>>>>> changes
>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll commit it in a branch as soon as I can.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> I too think it would be a great idea to resurrect
the status
>>>>>>>>>>>> meeting,
>>>>>>>>>>>> even if it's just once a month. I will schedule
something once
>>>>>>>>>>>> I've
>>>>>>>>>>>> committed something. Can you remind me, are
you guys able to use
>>>>>>>>>>>> Google
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hangouts or would webex be a better choice?
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Gavin
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 


Mime
View raw message