commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rahul Akolkar" <rahul.akol...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] JCL dependency versions
Date Wed, 01 Nov 2006 19:05:05 GMT
On 11/1/06, Henri Yandell <flamefew@gmail.com> wrote:
> -1 - we don't have the parallel release cycle to pull this off. We'll
> all be stuck because commons doodah has no reason to upgrade and no
> one active on it.
>
<snip/>

Correct, we can't help doodah. But this vote is really not about a
parallel release cycle, or any assumptions thereof. Its about
persuading doodah to upgrade JCL, whenever doodah++ is released (and
if it is never released again, the question doesn't arise).


> I'm +1 to upgrading all the dependencies though - I wouldn't even
> think it needs a vote. Just dig in and upgrade all the dependencies
> you see (on all 3 build systems) and check they still compile. Then
> check it in.
>
<snap/>

Components should have communal responsibility. That is the only thing
that is going to scale.

One person cannot save planetcommons. We cannot require one individual
to go through all (80-odd components, lets say 50 have JCL dep, and 3
builds systems) to upgrade it. Well, I guess we can require it, its
just unlikely to ever happen that way, which puts users at a
disadvantage as this won't get done.


> That's why I'm miffed about the commons-parent thing - it's broken the
> components because the job hasn't been finished by updating the
> pom.xmls. I know it's probably because it can be easy to view Commons
> Xxxx as Fred's baby, but it's one big codebase and you can go dive in
> and do cross-commons things that seem to be common sense and apologise
> later - or raise an all thread to discuss (kind of like below) and
> then dive in.
>
<snip/>

I understand, and I am happy to discuss current state of affairs of
the m2 build. I agree it shouldn't have been broken in the first
place, but I don't have time to fix it right now. I will however, take
a look next weekend at the latest (not the upcoming one, the one in 10
days) and try to help. If you have done a preliminary scan, let me
know what components you want me to look at -- that'd be great since
it will help me get started. I don't think of Commons-Xxxx as Fred's
baby, I just don't have the resources to babysit 80 kids everyday.

But thats an aside. Don't let the m2 situation distract you from the
essense of the vote below.

-Rahul


> Hen
>
> On 11/1/06, Rahul Akolkar <rahul.akolkar@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Speaking of cross-commons, the JCL deps are all over the place. Which
> > is probably OK for now, since most variants are point releases (1.0,
> > 1.0.2, 1.0.3, 1.0.4 being popular ATM).
> >
> > Since JCL is the bottom rung of the ladder, we should do our bit and
> > move as one (i.e. if a component wants to up the JCL version, it
> > should be an [all] discussion, and all components should update trunk
> > such that their next RC matches up). We could restrict this to minor
> > or major release updates, but I don't see any harm in keeping the JCL
> > point release consistent as well.
> >
> > [  ] +1 Sounds reasonable
> > [  ]  0
> > [  ] -1 Sounds unreasonable
> >
> > -Rahul
> >

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message