commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dan Tran <dant...@gmail.com>
Subject Promote vfs-cifs out of sandbox?
Date Sun, 16 Sep 2012 06:36:51 GMT
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


Mime
View raw message