commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dan Tran <dant...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Promote vfs-cifs out of sandbox?
Date Wed, 19 Sep 2012 04:49:40 GMT
I turns out the current vfs-smb sandbox already have tests, all we
need is to provide it with a test url ( via system property) per vfs
test instruction

There are 2 fail tests relate to classloader cases which I am not familiar with

Can some one take a look?

Thanks

-D

On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Dan Tran <dantran@gmail.com> wrote:
> I dont know if there is any read only public server.
>
> Can you just roll in cifs provider into the trunk for 2.1?  I will be
> your first beta customer ( even thou we are already perform intensive
> test in house )
>
> -D
>
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I could see releasing 2.1 ASAP which is on my to-do list. fixing We could
>> then roll out a 2.1.1 or 2.2 with this code in it. But there still would
>> need to be some kind of testing. Is there a public server that could be
>> used for at least read-only tests?
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Dan Tran <dantran@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> perhaps, we can release smb provider as is at commons-vfs and mark it
>>> as experimental? I see a number of apache project doing that.
>>>
>>> -D
>>>
>>> On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 11:36 PM, Dan Tran <dantran@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > Hello all,
>>> >
>>> > I took a closer look at writing unit test case for vfs-cifs and came
>>> > to a conclusion that the test cases are tough to develop since there
>>> > is no available embedded cifs server available ( note that the current
>>> > test cases for other provider heavily depends on embedded server like
>>> > ftp, sftp, webdav, etc ).  And mocking the testcase up is not that
>>> > worth.
>>> >
>>> > So I would like to propose to release cifs provider as a beta together
>>> > with vfs-maven-plugin and have users to test it out. My company is
>>> > using intensively in house and about the bring it to full production (
>>> > there fore I need to release vfs-maven-plugin at MOJO's codehaus soon
>>> > )
>>> >
>>> > Any objection for me release it as propose using the same java package
>>> > name( org.apache.commons.vfs.... )  at codehaus?
>>> >
>>> > Thanks
>>> >
>>> > -D
>>> >
>>> > Note I do have test case for cift using provided example pom
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> > From: Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com>
>>> > Date: Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:49 AM
>>> > Subject: Re: Promote vfs-cift out of sandbox?
>>> > To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Dan Tran <dantran@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> I have from now to Octorber to  either:
>>> >>
>>> >>   1. Implement test requirement to graduate vfs-cifs out of sandbox
at
>>> >> Apache common
>>> >>
>>> >>   2. Release it as a alpha/beta at Codehaus together with
>>> vfs-maven-plugin
>>> >>
>>> >>   3. Release to our internal repo.
>>> >>
>>> >> The prefer one is 1
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > So do I :)
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >> What is VFS 2.1 schedule?
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > I would like to push out a 2.1 sooner rather than later. I still see some
>>> > internal clean ups I'd like to do. So it might be out in a month or two.
>>> Or
>>> > not, it depends on my schedule, priorities and feedback I get once I
>>> start
>>> > cutting release candidates.
>>> >
>>> > It's possible that by October, VFS will be on 2.2, 2.3 or greater.
>>> >
>>> > Gary
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >> Thanks
>>> >>
>>> >> -Dan
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 11:01 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com>
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >> > Dan? What are your plans or intentions here?
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Thank you,
>>> >> > Gary
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 12:48 AM, Gary Gregory <
>>> garydgregory@gmail.com
>>> >> >wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> On Jul 19, 2012, at 12:11, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com>
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > On Jul 18, 2012, at 10:38 AM, sebb wrote:
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >>>>>
>>> >> >> >>>>> Can the above be read as follows for VFS
and JCIFS: you cannot
>>> >> copy
>>> >> >> the
>>> >> >> >>>>> JCIFS jar into VFS (which we do not) but
the VFS POM can point
>>> to
>>> >> it
>>> >> >> (which
>>> >> >> >>>>> we do).
>>> >> >> >>>>
>>> >> >> >>>> The above document is only proposed, not actual
policy.
>>> >> >> >>>>
>>> >> >> >>>> The following is the resolved list of questions:
>>> >> >> >>>>
>>> >> >> >>>> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
>>> >> >> >>>>
>>> >> >> >>>> In particular:
>>> >> >> >>>>
>>> >> >> >>>> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#optional
>>> >> >> >>>>
>>> >> >> >>>> "Will the majority of users want to use my
product without
>>> adding
>>> >> the
>>> >> >> >>>> optional components?
>>> >> >> >>>
>>> >> >> >>> I do not see how this helps. It's yes or no: Can
the VFS POM
>>> point
>>> >> to
>>> >> >> >>> a set of artifacts that are LGPL?
>>> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> Whether the answer is yes or no depends on the answer
to the above
>>> >> >> question.
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > There are only a few file systems in VFS that should be
considered
>>> >> >> required. All the ones that require the user to include a third-party
>>> >> jar -
>>> >> >> even if it is Jackrabbit's - are optional.  We could easily
include
>>> file
>>> >> >> systems that have dependencies on artifacts that are licensed
under
>>> the
>>> >> >> LGPL or similar licenses (although I would still shy away from
GPL'd
>>> >> works
>>> >> >> because of the FSF's interpretation of their license).
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > The biggest issue I see with the stuff in the sandbox
isn't
>>> licensing
>>> >> >> but if anyone will support it.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Ok, so the short answer is yes, we can move to trunk. The issue
is
>>> >> >> whether someone can bring the code up to par. That person sounds
like
>>> >> >> the author of the original post. After that, it's up to the
>>> >> >> committers, like me, to keep up.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Gary
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > Ralph
>>> >> >> >
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> >> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --
>>> >> > E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>> >> > JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0
>>> >> > Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>>> >> > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>> >> > Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>> >> > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>> >>
>>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>> > JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0
>>> > Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>>> > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>> > Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>> > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0
>> Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

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


Mime
View raw message