directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Phil Steitz <p...@steitz.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Directory project releases II
Date Wed, 05 Jan 2005 19:28:02 GMT
Sorry for the latency. I am with you guys.  I restored the ant build and 
will tag and roll an rc we can vote on this evening, assuming I can get 
ssh access from the road (travelling today).  I will kick off the vote 
once I have the rc that includes the ant build. I also need to update my 
svn client so it recognizes the $Revision$ tag and updates the contents 
of these strings in the source (which are now incorrect in the source 
distro).

Any additional comments on the tarballs that I have up now
<http://www.apache.org/~psteitz/naming> would be appreciated.

Also if others can test - or improve ;-) the ant builds that would be great.

Phil

Alex Karasulu wrote:
> I second what Brett has said completely.
> 
> 
>>From: Brett Porter <brett@apache.org>
>>Date: 2005/01/04 Tue PM 05:38:56 EST
>>To: Apache Directory Developers List <directory-dev@incubator.apache.org>
>>Subject: RE: RE: [VOTE] Directory project releases II
>>
>>Quoting Phil Steitz <phil@steitz.com>:
>>
>>
>>>As a point of clarification, the full javadoc is included in the binary
>>>naming dist.  It is, however, divided among the maven subprojects under the
>>>/docs directory, which is a full image of the web site.  I agree with Steve
>>>that full javadoc should be provided as part of the release dist. 
>>
>>I agree for the binary, not for the source. If you are getting the source dist
>>and are using Maven/Ant to build it, you can do likewise for the javadoc (does
>>the ant script contain a goal for that?)
>>
>>
>>>To release naming, however, we need consensus on the issue raised in my
>>>previous post to this thread:  are we going to release "components" from the
>>>Directory project at this time?  If the answer is "no" we need to hold off
>>>releasing naming from this project.  
>>
>>At least from my POV in the last email, and what appears to be the general
>>consensus is that it is a "no" to the new components, but "yes" to naming as it
>>is different.
>>
>>reasons:
>>- naming is mature
>>- it has 3 people across it here and presumably the current Tomcat maintainers
>>could be encouraged to join in here if we are getting this release put back into
>>the latest Tomcat to replace their naming code from which it was derived
>>- it is useful standalone, as well as inside Tomcat and TSFKAE
>>
>>
>>>Assuming the answer is "yes" I would
>>>also like to get review and support from the tomcat community (where almost
>>>all of the code originated) before release.  In any case, I want to settle
>>>the question about components before we release one.
>>
>>I think it is time we started an individual vote on naming to see where everyone
>>stands. The directory server can have its own after Alex's questions about how
>>to bundle the release is addressed.
>>
>>Would you like to kick off the vote based on the previous one? All issues
>>brought up since by myself and Steven seem to have been addressed (assuming we
>>agree on the location of javadoc, and the license has indeed been fixed).
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Brett
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 


Mime
View raw message