continuum-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rahul Thakur <rahul.thakur.x...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Discussion] Continuum 2.0 Roadmap
Date Wed, 06 Feb 2008 19:04:24 GMT

If everyone is happy to keep the history till date on codehaus wiki, I 
can help copy stuff across to Apache wiki :-)

Rahul


Brett Porter wrote:
> We can create such a wiki any time - the challenge is converting 
> existing content. If someone is happy to lose history and do it by 
> hand, it can be done straight away.
>
> On 06/02/2008, at 9:25 PM, Rahul Thakur wrote:
>
>> Some good points emerging from this discussion! :-)
>>
>> Would it be a nice idea to put following on wiki:
>> 1)  State goals/philosophy for C2 in light of lessons learnt from 1.x 
>> development - lean, mean, extensible (~add any other here~)
>> 2)  Document *all* features/requirements we want to see in C2 on wiki 
>> (even if they are already present in 1.x!).
>> 3)  Draw a proposed architecture.
>> 4)  Assign items in (1) a priority/weight. Add use-cases to each item 
>> in (1) to determine this.
>> 5)  Group the priortised requirements/features into milestones.
>> 6)  Start cutting code.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> PS: Codehaus wiki seems to be very slow. Any chance we can have a 
>> space created on Apache wiki? Or, I guess it will have to wait for 
>> TLP vote.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Rahul
>>
>> Brett Porter wrote:
>>> This looks very exciting, and agree with most of the thread that 
>>> follows. I'm just going to reply in summary - most of my thoughts 
>>> are actually non-technical :)
>>>
>>> Regarding databases: I don't think xml files are the solution 
>>> (except for the configuration where it makes a lot more sense :) - 
>>> the data needs to be queryable. I think Andy made a good point in 
>>> his comment on the roadmap - we need to look at the actual problems. 
>>> Here's what I think needs to be improved:
>>> - better centralisation of access. The architecture of Continuum 
>>> bleeds JDO decisions all through the code since you access lazy 
>>> stuff for the first time in obscure places.
>>> - I think this might be that the model is too complicated (sorry, my 
>>> fault) - it assumes complex relationships are handled easily. It 
>>> seems to be going ok these days, but I feel it would be hard to modify.
>>> I haven't looked at Rahul's branch yet, but I think we should 
>>> consider a more decoupled database (ie, lookup build results for a 
>>> project but keep them separate in the model to avoid the need to 
>>> lazyload 90% of the time), and more centralised database logic. I 
>>> would consider JPA just because it gives more options in terms of an 
>>> implementation. It is quite easy to use from a development 
>>> standpoint. But we also need to consider what functionality is 
>>> needed up front - I think high on the list needs to be migrations 
>>> between versions. Also, We are probably going to need to store more 
>>> data in the future, and be able to query it (particularly historical 
>>> datapoints).
>>>
>>> On the container: I would prefer to move off Plexus simply because 
>>> it's a moving target and it's a barrier to entry for new developers.
>>>
>>> Now, my more general observations. Firstly, the roadmap doesn't 
>>> appear to have any features - these are all technology changes. Some 
>>> of that might be cool and a feature in itself, but I think there 
>>> needs to be a balance between evolution, features, and bugfixing. I 
>>> would also emphasise that features should be creative new things 
>>> Continuum can do (for which we've had plenty of ideas), not just 
>>> catching up to other CI servers :)
>>>
>>> I think the first part of the roadmap is key - separating the layers 
>>> out, and basically building Continuum to be lightweight and 
>>> distributed from the ground up. I hope that's the focus of the 
>>> development. Note this also impacts the database as it should store 
>>> much less information on builder machines (it can ship history back 
>>> to the main server).
>>>
>>> I also think that supporting plugins is a good idea - it has been a 
>>> huge bonus in other apps and in Maven itself. I'd like to 
>>> investigate using OSGi for this.
>>>
>>> But by far the biggest question I have is what happened to 1.2? I 
>>> think Continuum needs to set a target to achieve, but get there in 
>>> gradual steps that at each stage sees a production release. The long 
>>> 1.1 cycle really set Continuum back - a lot of it was changing 
>>> features, but there was also a lot of changing technologies :) I 
>>> don't think Continuum will survive another year-and-a-half release 
>>> cycle. So the start could be to break all the actions out (plexus, 
>>> not webwork) into services and add some features, then the next 
>>> release could adjust the database model and add some other features. 
>>> And as we split these things out we make sure they are nicely 
>>> documented and tested.
>>>
>>> That's my thoughts :)
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Brett
>>>
>>> On 30/01/2008, at 9:34 AM, Emmanuel Venisse wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> I started a document [1] with my ideas about Continuum 2.
>>>> As you can see in this doc, I want to add lot of things in the next 
>>>> version.
>>>>
>>>> Feel free to comment on it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [1]
>>>> http://docs.codehaus.org/display/CONTINUUM/Continuum+2.0+Design+Discussion

>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Emmanuel
>>>
>>>
>
>

Mime
View raw message