Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-chemistry-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-chemistry-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2B4D6183A8 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 14:36:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 56930 invoked by uid 500); 6 Oct 2015 14:36:50 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-chemistry-dev-archive@chemistry.apache.org Received: (qmail 56877 invoked by uid 500); 6 Oct 2015 14:36:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@chemistry.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@chemistry.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@chemistry.apache.org Received: (qmail 56866 invoked by uid 99); 6 Oct 2015 14:36:49 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Oct 2015 14:36:49 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 8D18B180A83 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 14:36:49 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.982 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.982 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY=1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-eu-west.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Znyqdaovn5Id for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 14:36:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plasma6.jpberlin.de (plasma6.jpberlin.de [80.241.56.68]) by mx1-eu-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-eu-west.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 8C2F8204C8 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 14:36:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hefe.heinlein-support.de (hefe.heinlein-support.de [91.198.250.172]) by plasma.jpberlin.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CEC4AD87A; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 16:36:35 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at heinlein-support.de Received: from plasma.jpberlin.de ([91.198.250.140]) by hefe.heinlein-support.de (hefe.heinlein-support.de [91.198.250.172]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ub2BLyhfBJbQ; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 16:36:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from webmail.jpberlin.de (sinatra7.heinlein-hosting.de [91.198.250.143]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: fmueller@jpberlin.de) by plasma.jpberlin.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 249F1AD5A2; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 16:36:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from V2mv2mpYG3O6tEsq946q4EnuklWoNUKo1zNnay2s4VI= (93IwDOLhM/rSBieFtRjPQnKl33Mewjk4) by webmail.jpberlin.de with HTTP (HTTP/1.1 POST); Tue, 06 Oct 2015 16:36:33 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 16:36:33 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Florian_M=C3=BCller?= To: dev@chemistry.apache.org Cc: michael.javaone@gmail.com, Michael Brackx , Florent Guillaume Subject: Re: Release 0.14 / 1.0 =?UTF-8?Q?=3F?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: X-Sender: fmui@apache.org User-Agent: RoundCube Webmail Hi, A 0.14.0 release would work for me. Would someone take over the release management? If we are ready for 1.0 is up to the community. I would prefer at least one more intermediated release to make sure that the Web Services changes (JAX-WS RI -> CXF) work for most users. @Michael: Please open improvement requests in JIRA and elaborate on your requirements. Wishes and bugs we don't know cannot be implemented or fixed. - Florian > Hi, > > I'm in favour of frequent release, so a 0.14 release is fine for me. > > However, for a 1.0 there are some things i would like to see :) > > A quick list, that needs some more elaboration: > - java api more geared towards browser binding > - less internal extra service calls > - custom query params support > - rate limiting remote calls for TCK > > Michael > > On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Florent Guillaume wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> There have been a number of small bugfixes committed since the last >> 0.13 release in April. Should we release a new version? Is it time to >> switch to 1.0 or are there more things we want to do before that? >> >> Cheers, >> Florent >> >> -- >> Florent Guillaume, Director of R&D, Nuxeo >> Open Source Content Management Platform for Business Apps >> http://www.nuxeo.com http://community.nuxeo.com >>