continuum-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brett Porter <>
Subject Re: wiki was: [Discussion] Continuum 2.0 Roadmap
Date Wed, 13 Feb 2008 05:01:40 GMT
Ok, I've created two wiki's:
(exported to:

This one is open to all users to edit, so is the traditional wiki/ 
cookbook area.
(exported to:

This one is editable by developers only (accepts comments from  
anyone). This is for the roadmap and design docs. I only granted  
access to a few people that I could easily find - if you need to edit,  
just let me or a confluence admin know.

So once this is migrated, we can point the Codehaus ones at this.

I have not yet set up an rsync to - if there's a  
place we should house this under the Continuum site we can do that.  
Also, the template probably needs some modifications.


On 07/02/2008, at 6:04 AM, Rahul Thakur wrote:

> 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]
>>>>> Emmanuel

Brett Porter

View raw message