commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rahul Akolkar" <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] JCL dependency versions
Date Wed, 01 Nov 2006 19:05:05 GMT
On 11/1/06, Henri Yandell <> 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.

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.

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.

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.


> Hen
> On 11/1/06, Rahul Akolkar <> 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:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message