deltaspike-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petra...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Heading towards a 0.4 release
Date Wed, 27 Mar 2013 09:05:27 GMT
@ "...everyone is free to just add a feature branch...":
imo we should keep [1] for single features. otherwise we end up with 100+
branches and we can't drop a single one later on (if it would be needed)...
however, we also have to think about an approach for v1+
-> i would suggest to add >new modules< via (feature-)branches once we
agreed to add them to deltaspike (in a [discuss]-thread on the dev-list).
once a module is stable enough to get part of the next release, we can
merge its branch into the master.

regards,
gerhard

[1]
http://incubator.apache.org/deltaspike/suggested-git-workflows.html#contribution-workflow



2013/3/27 Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>

> yup please later than 0.4.
> I'd say we call a feature freeze until we ship 0.4 (hopefully next week)
> and focus on
>
> * JSF
> * JPA
> * Security
>
> After that we can add new features to the master branch.
>
> Of course, everyone is free to just add a feature branch for a new feature
> which is outside those areas.
>
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Jason Porter <lightguard.jp@gmail.com>
> > To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 2:28 PM
> > Subject: Re: Heading towards a 0.4 release
> >
> >T he last time I asked about it the responses seemed lukewarm, so I
> figured it
> > wasn't something people really cared about. We could certainly add it in
> > post 0.4 if there really is a desire for it.
> > —
> > Sent from Mailbox for iPhone
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 7:23 AM, John D. Ament <john.d.ament@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>  Jason,
> >>  Does that mean we are no longer bringing XML config to DeltaSpike, even
> >>  though it was already voted in?
> >>  On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Jason Porter
> > <lightguard.jp@gmail.com>wrote:
> >>>  Wrt xml-config, I'll be working on configuring cdi via osgi
> > blueprint,
> >>>  over in the Aries project. If we want to port over the seam config
> > stuff,
> >>>  we can certainly do that too.
> >>>  —
> >>>  Sent from Mailbox for iPhone
> >>>
> >>>  On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 4:42 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> > <rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >>>  >
> >>>  wrote:
> >>>
> >>>  > @Gerhard: the point about proxy was i thought it was not straight
> > forward
> >>>  > since some people will not want to bring any additional lib for it
> >>>  (because
> >>>  > they use only interfaces and proxy libs can conflcts). Wonder if
> > handling
> >>>  > it with a dep optional couldn't do the trick too.
> >>>  > *Romain Manni-Bucau*
> >>>  > *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
> >>>  > *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
> >>>  http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
> >>>  > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
> >>>  > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
> >>>  > 2013/3/26 Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com>
> >>>  >> @ romain:
> >>>  >> imo it doesn't make sense to remove something (and add it
> > later on
> >>>  again),
> >>>  >> if it's just a matter of few hours (to do it immediately).
> >>>  >> anybody is welcome to work on DS-333.
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >> @ DS-288
> >>>  >> it's almost done and as i mentioned earlier i'll
> > finish it once DS-289
> >>>  is
> >>>  >> done.
> >>>  >> (yes we need it for 0.4)
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >> @ xml-config
> >>>  >> afair we had an agreement already, but nobody worked on it.
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >> regards,
> >>>  >> gerhard
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >> 2013/3/26 John D. Ament <john.d.ament@gmail.com>
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >> > I think leaving proxy support to full interface only for
> > now makes
> >>>  sense,
> >>>  >> > we can enrich this further in another release.  How about
> > we close 113
> >>>  >> as a
> >>>  >> > reduced scope and open a new issue for remaining items?
> > I see you
> >>>  >> already
> >>>  >> > did some Gerhard, but we still have abstract classes as a
> > case as
> >>>  well.
> >>>  >> >
> >>>  >> > Gerhard, can you also comment on 288? Do we need this in
> > 0.4 or can it
> >>>  >> > wait?
> >>>  >> >
> >>>  >> > Romain, I didn't quite get you.  Are you saying
> > you're on hold on this
> >>>  >> one
> >>>  >> > (dependent on something?).
> >>>  >> >
> >>>  >> > Does anyone believe we need Seam XML Config in 0.4?
> > (DS-269 to 272).
> >>>   I'd
> >>>  >> > prefer to move it.
> >>>  >> >
> >>>  >> > For DS-105, it looks like consensus is to keep it since
> > it's needed
> >>>  for
> >>>  >> > older Weld versions. If so can we close as will not fix?
> >>>  >> >
> >>>  >> > Jason P - Can you look at DS-132/134? Do we need these?
> > There are
> >>>  other
> >>>  >> > catch like issues out there.  Are they needed?
> >>>  >> >
> >>>  >> > Mark S - You have 12 issues assigned to you :/
> >>>  >> >
> >>>  >> > BTW I created a new filter - only open issues [1]
> >>>  >> >
> >>>  >> > John
> >>>  >> >
> >>>  >> > [1]
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12323789
> >>>  >> >
> >>>  >> >
> >>>  >> > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>>  >> > <rmannibucau@gmail.com>wrote:
> >>>  >> >
> >>>  >> > > Hi
> >>>  >> > >
> >>>  >> > > DS-60: we are a bunch o wait after it
> >>>  >> > >
> >>>  >> > > DS-113: think we can push partial bean to another
> > release and keep
> >>>  >> > > interface handling for this iteration (well if you
> > import asm part
> >>>  >> right
> >>>  >> > > now it can work but then the question will be which
> > shade version? a
> >>>  >> > proxy
> >>>  >> > > as in cxf?....)
> >>>  >> > >
> >>>  >> > > other are not blocker IMO
> >>>  >> > >
> >>>  >> > >
> >>>  >> > > *Romain Manni-Bucau*
> >>>  >> > > *Twitter: @rmannibucau
> > <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
> >>>  >> > > *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
> >>>  >> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
> >>>  >> > > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
> >>>  >> > > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
> >>>  >> > >
> >>>  >> > >
> >>>  >> > >
> >>>  >> > > 2013/3/25 Gerhard Petracek
> > <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com>
> >>>  >> > >
> >>>  >> > > > hi john,
> >>>  >> > > >
> >>>  >> > > > @ examples:
> >>>  >> > > > we haven't discussed what our goal is here
> >>>  >> > > >
> >>>  >> > > > @ DS-60
> >>>  >> > > > imo we should do it for 0.5 (and release 0.5
> >> short< after 0.4)
> >>>  >> > > >
> >>>  >> > > > @ DS-113
> >>>  >> > > > we have to change the proxy-lib and move it to
> > an own module
> >>>  >> > > > (i'll create the module today)
> >>>  >> > > >
> >>>  >> > > > @ DS-263
> >>>  >> > > > not needed, but nice to have -> +1
> >>>  >> > > > (you can have a look at the setup we used in
> > codi for it to know
> >>>  what
> >>>  >> > you
> >>>  >> > > > need)
> >>>  >> > > >
> >>>  >> > > > @ DS-278
> >>>  >> > > > i re-opened it because we should find a better
> > approach imo.
> >>>  >> > > > however, it isn't a real blocker
> >>>  >> > > >
> >>>  >> > > > regards,
> >>>  >> > > > gerhard
> >>>  >> > > >
> >>>  >> > > >
> >>>  >> > > >
> >>>  >> > > > 2013/3/25 John D. Ament
> > <john.d.ament@gmail.com>
> >>>  >> > > >
> >>>  >> > > > > All,
> >>>  >> > > > >
> >>>  >> > > > > Based on the flurry of threads, I wanted
> > to help get things
> >>>  started
> >>>  >> > to
> >>>  >> > > > move
> >>>  >> > > > > towards a 0.4 release.  I created the
> > filter at [1] to show our
> >>>  >> > current
> >>>  >> > > > > progress.
> >>>  >> > > > >
> >>>  >> > > > > We currently have 50 issues fixed in 0.4,
> > with 27 unresolved for
> >>>  >> the
> >>>  >> > > > > release.  Some of these issues stick out,
> > with me thinking that
> >>>  >> we've
> >>>  >> > > > > actually completed them but perhaps need
> > some finalization
> >>>  (note:
> >>>  >> > I'll
> >>>  >> > > > use
> >>>  >> > > > > the abbreviation DS for the DELTASPIKE key
> > in JIRA which is
> >>>  TL;DR)
> >>>  >> > > > >
> >>>  >> > > > > DS-306 - I see examples.  Do we need more?
> >>>  >> > > > > DS-60 - I believe we have started
> > integrating CDI Query.  Should
> >>>  >> this
> >>>  >> > > > have
> >>>  >> > > > > spawned child tasks?
> >>>  >> > > > > DS-113 - Gerhard took the reigns on this
> > one and apparently it
> >>>  >> works
> >>>  >> > > just
> >>>  >> > > > > like the Seam3 version.  Can this be
> > closed?
> >>>  >> > > > >
> >>>  >> > > > >
> >>>  >> > > > > Some low hanging fruit:
> >>>  >> > > > >
> >>>  >> > > > > DS-263 - I was actually looking for
> > something like this as well.
> >>>  >> >  I've
> >>>  >> > > > been
> >>>  >> > > > > playing with JBoss modules a lot and think
> > having a binary
> >>>  release
> >>>  >> > > would
> >>>  >> > > > > help add DS as a JBoss Module.  If this
> > isn't complete, do we
> >>>  need
> >>>  >> it
> >>>  >> > > in
> >>>  >> > > > > 0.4?
> >>>  >> > > > >
> >>>  >> > > > > DS-278 - If not done, seems easy enough to
> > add.
> >>>  >> > > > >
> >>>  >> > > > > DS-288 - Seems like another needed
> > feature, but wasn't too
> >>>  >> difficult
> >>>  >> > in
> >>>  >> > > > > either CODI or Seam3.
> >>>  >> > > > >
> >>>  >> > > > > DS-289 - Ironically, this one isn't
> > even scheduled for 0.4 but
> >>>  is a
> >>>  >> > > > blocker
> >>>  >> > > > > for the release.  I'll update it as
> > such.
> >>>  >> > > > >
> >>>  >> > > > > If you have something in the list below
> > that shouldn't be (e.g.
> >>>  >> it's
> >>>  >> > > not
> >>>  >> > > > > needed for 0.4) we should get it
> > rescheduled.  Since previously
> >>>  >> only
> >>>  >> > > 289
> >>>  >> > > > > was declared needed for 0.4 we should be
> > looking at everything
> >>>  >> else.
> >>>  >> > > > >
> >>>  >> > > > > John
> >>>  >> > > > >
> >>>  >> > > > > [1]:
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12323788
> >>>  >> > > > >
> >>>  >> > > >
> >>>  >> > >
> >>>  >> >
> >>>  >>
> >>>
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message