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 Tue, 01 Apr 2014 09:19:08 GMT
Hi Lukas,

As you probably saw I committed the extra fixes last night so I think we’re now all set
for the 0.3 release.

Regards,

Gavin



On 31 Mar 2014, at 17:03, Gavin Cornwell <gavin.cornwell@alfresco.com> wrote:

> Hi Lukas,
> 
> I’m going to retract that statement, we have found some more occurrences of the issue
in CMISFolder and a couple in CMISSession.
> 
> Please continue to hold off the release until tomorrow.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Gavin
> 
> 
> 
> On 31 Mar 2014, at 16:40, Gavin Cornwell <gavin.cornwell@alfresco.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Lukas,
>> 
>> The issue with cancelling create operations is resolved and the fix committed.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Gavin
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 31 Mar 2014, at 15:48, Gross, Lukas <lukas.gross@sap.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Gavin,
>>> 
>>> Sure - just drop me an email when you have fixed the issue :)
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Lukas
>>> 
>>> On 3/31/14 3:51 PM, "Gavin Cornwell" <gavin.cornwell@alfresco.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 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