Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" <dev@directory.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of elecharny@gmail.com designates
 66.249.90.178 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=HHulyLLqE/gzlchl9ml7UYsLpUAY8CbAFO1zH2raN+lpcEfxZn+Nj46rrqor66YJgDJuZPTHDoCI+c21eJMG2VA1I9XmhSh8Aj4Wfp6ZTZXH36uUef5CuN1PAdBeiEvzOwSAMK91s3RYQ0aRjMFz75Owc2beCsToSKMKiS4A2kg=
Message-ID: <d45b08f00706210537w64c7246dma1d3a84e4c5f242@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 14:37:42 +0200
From: "Emmanuel Lecharny" <elecharny@gmail.com>
Reply-To: elecharny@iktek.com
To: "Apache Directory Developers List" <dev@directory.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Should we have a 0.8.1 release of Apache LDAP Studio ?
In-Reply-To: <98d8c0860706210254g290c1be4yfdec8d60534d9f95@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <98d8c0860706210254g290c1be4yfdec8d60534d9f95@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

considering that releasing Apache Directory Studio is just a matter of
minutes (it's totally different for ADS), then I think this is
acceptable.

Now, I have some concern about releasing a version just because one
user has some problems with the tagged version. This 0.8.1 will be a
direct branch started on 0.8 release, not related at all to the trunk.

This won't be a bug release, so I would say it can be preferable to
tell the user to build ADStudio from trunks.

Pam concern is about other x64 version users : they will get the very
same error, and will post the same message. I agree that it is a pb.
At this point, nighty build may help... but ADStudio is huge (more
than 30 Mb)

Complicated vote.

 [X] +1 : We should release Apache LDAP Studio 0.8.1 with these new "featur=
es"

Ok, this will be the last time ;)
Emmanuel
On 6/21/07, Pierre-Arnaud Marcelot <pa@marcelot.net> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Mateusz Kijowski, one of our users, has just reported that it is impossib=
le
> to install within eclipse (with the update site) the standalone plugins o=
f
> Apache LDAP Studio on a x86_64 machine (I'm talking of Apache LDAP Studio
> instead of Apache Directory Studio because it's the name of the latest 0.=
8.0
> release).
>
> Indeed, in the plugins definitions we had set the targeted environments t=
o
> be PPC and X86_64 only. However, plugins are not impacted and are complet=
ely
> functional on the x86_64 architecture, as Mateusz says.
>
> The only thing needed to fix this issue is add the X86_64 architecture in
> all the plugins (and features) definitions and rebuild the updatesite.
>
> Furthermore, since the release of 0.8.0, with the help of Andreas Roth,
> another user, we managed to get the RCP application running on Linux AMD6=
4
> machines, where it was not running before.
>
> I was wondering if we should not be releasing a 0.8.1 of Apache LDAP Stud=
io
> to include these two fixes that can help us have more users to use our
> application or if we should wait the next release (which will not occur
> before 1 or 2 months I think)...
>
> What do you think ?
>
> [ ] +1 : We should release Apache LDAP Studio 0.8.1 with these new
> "features"
> [ ] 0    : Abstain
> [ ] -1   : We should wait for the next release to introduce these new
> "features"
>
> Thanks,
>
> Pierre-Arnaud
>


--=20
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel L=E9charny
www.iktek.com