continuum-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rahul Thakur <rahul.thakur.xd...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Discussion] Continuum 2.0 Roadmap
Date Fri, 08 Feb 2008 02:56:53 GMT

Here's my list:

1)  Peformance improvements.
2)  A slicker User Interface. Ability to let the user work in an offline 
mode (Google Gears!) and sync periodically.
3)  Good user and developer documentation.
4)  Better public APIs (rework Store and Continuum)

Rahul

Napoleon Esmundo C. Ramirez wrote:
> Just some thoughts,
>
> I strongly agree to the proposed technology changes, particularly in the
> database, as it will definitely improve the storage performance.  In line
> with the objectives to make Continuum a slick CI server, I think the design
> changes is a good move as well.  In my opinion, having plugins will provide
> a platform for flexibility and a workflow-type of approach in managing the
> builds.
>
> My proposed features would be the following:
> 1.  Aside from the improvement in the UI, I think a visual representation of
> statistics would be nice.  Graphs of the success rates, charts of project
> health, etc.  I think Bamboo has it as telemetry.
> 2.  Distributed builds, this has been started before but it was never used.
> I think this would be a strong point in using Continuum if it were
> available.  Hudson has it, iirc.  I think implementing it as a plugin would
> provide more control to it.
>
> Again, just my thoughts.
>
> Cheers!
> Nap
>
> On Feb 6, 2008 8:12 AM, Carlos Sanchez<carlos@apache.org>  wrote:
>
>    
>> Some comments
>>
>> Database vs xml: definitely database. Throwing away the db access api
>> (JDO/JPA/...) now that it's already there doesnt make much sense.
>> Maybe there are implementations that use xml for storage and that's
>> where you'd need to look if you want file storage
>>
>> Spring vs Guice vs Plexus: Spring for sure. Big community, lots of
>> users, documentation, support,... Specially if you want to add JMX
>> support (can be done really easily just with annotations using
>> reflection), and thinking in OSGi in the future I'm sure it will be
>> really easy to integrate Spring and OSGi if it is not already. I'd
>> start softly, just migrating thing that would require adding features
>> to plexus, and move from there.
>>
>> I agree with Brett on having 1.2, 1.3,... it's good to have a list of
>> what you want to do for 2.0 but as it gets done it should be released
>> in minor versions.
>>
>> On Jan 29, 2008 2:34 PM, Emmanuel Venisse<emmanuel@venisse.net>  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
>>>
>>>        
>>
>> --
>> I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
>> No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
>>                              -- The Princess Bride
>>
>>      
>
>    


Mime
View raw message