Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 42505 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2008 11:00:44 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 31 Jan 2008 11:00:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 9154 invoked by uid 500); 31 Jan 2008 11:00:35 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 8933 invoked by uid 500); 31 Jan 2008 11:00:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 8922 invoked by uid 99); 31 Jan 2008 11:00:35 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:00:35 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of pajbam@gmail.com designates 72.14.252.154 as permitted sender) Received: from [72.14.252.154] (HELO po-out-1718.google.com) (72.14.252.154) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 11:00:05 +0000 Received: by po-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id c31so1078156poi.0 for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:00:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=f9uKACu7sytmnR737BVqAtBcNhi5TA99qiAX9E31/sA=; b=u8J009fcrcZHz0uNu7XBd9UJI4zi0JTvock4Cpxpcx6NulSrNO9evjqPR4Qdp1CyMQBwwRRGk76UhVMeA3Gklgzj2INuGT7idykP5X0QDvqh7FzR+1renUqh9O3qksKg8DDcSd+/99W6rr+cqvZVPbZwbL44EeJX9SyzDE8P7QU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=APtSou/1O8LsZKOBS88T7cR3WPv/Rwq40fCjzIfjPeNchG81pxAzMejNpKT76Q6WDopLcALrZvbBVKcTEGrABOPc5CCUGPnM6ZtZrdZtr6iLrc6UreEoXjNRxY3jwNi7yjKIlAlmM5SC9scTmkY2492WZ/1TUjpG3+I0lg4PXu4= Received: by 10.140.207.16 with SMTP id e16mr1333919rvg.297.1201777212892; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:00:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.141.37.16 with HTTP; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:00:12 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <98d8c0860801310300u3dd4a0ffq9a60f0b45cf101d9@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 12:00:12 +0100 From: "Pierre-Arnaud Marcelot" Sender: pajbam@gmail.com To: "Apache Directory Developers List" Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release of a new version of Shared LDAP for the Studio 1.1 release (was "Re: [Studio] Should we release a new version of Shared LDAP ?") In-Reply-To: <47A1A827.60704@apache.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_23107_20366296.1201777212896" References: <98d8c0860801210820l7af15234vfba2fa6b5abcc485@mail.gmail.com> <47A1A827.60704@apache.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 543919dd849980d7 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org ------=_Part_23107_20366296.1201777212896 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Thanks Felix for the heads up. You're right, I'll close this vote. Pierre-Arnaud On Jan 31, 2008 11:51 AM, Felix Knecht wrote: > The vote is already older than 1 week. Are there any decisions made? I > haven't seen any negativ votes but also no summary about a made decision. > Can we expect the release soon? > > Regards > Felix > > PS: > Just bumping that this vote doesn't get lost ;-) > > > > Ok, Thanks guys. > > There you go... > > > > Time to vote: > > [ ] +1 We should release a new version of Shared LDAP for the Studio > > 1.1 release > > [ ] +/-0 Abstain > > [ ] -1 We should NOT release a new version of Shared LDAP for the > > Studio 1.1 release > > > > Regards, > > Pierre-Arnaud > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2008 5:13 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny > > wrote: > > > > I'm waiting for the vote. This is just a good example why we need > > separate subprojects. Hopefully, shared-ldap and shared-codec is no= t > > part of another project ;) > > > > Alex Karasulu wrote: > > > Absolutely just kick off the vote. Although this is not a > > sub-project > > > in itself we can vote on it for release since other projects > > depend on it. > > > > > > Studio has just as much a right to push "shared" code releases > > as does > > > the server. > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2008 11:07 AM, Pierre-Arnaud Marcelot > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Dev, > > > > > > As you know, we're in the middle of a Studio (whether it's a > > RC or > > > not) and we're trying to fix as many bugs as possible. > > > > > > The issue DIRSTUDIO-266 (OpenLDAP schema files parser fails > when > > > DESC contains an empty string '') [1] depends on the Apache > > > Directory Shared LDAP project. This project is mainly used by > > > Apache Directory Server but also by Apache Directory Studio. > > > > > > As of now, the Studio project has been using this dependency > > as a > > > SNAPSHOT release, compiling a newest version when a bug was > > fixed > > > in the trunk of the project, as new releases of the Shared > LDAP > > > project only appear when there is a new release of the Apache > > > Directory Server. > > > > > > I was wondering if it would make sense to release more often > > the > > > Shared LDAP project, when either the Server or Studio project= s > > > need it for a release. > > > > > > WDYT ? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Pierre-Arnaud > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRSTUDIO-266 > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > -- > > cordialement, regards, > > Emmanuel L=E9charny > > www.iktek.com > > directory.apache.org > > > > > > > > ------=_Part_23107_20366296.1201777212896 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Thanks Felix for the heads up.

You're right, I'll close this= vote.

Pierre-Arnaud

On Jan 31, 20= 08 11:51 AM, Felix Knecht <felixk@a= pache.org> wrote:
The vote is alrea= dy older than 1 week. Are there any decisions made? I
haven't seen a= ny negativ votes but also no summary about a made decision.
Can we expect the release soon?

Regards
Felix

PS:
Just = bumping that this vote doesn't get lost ;-)

> Ok, Thanks guys.
> There you go...
>
> Time to= vote:
> [ ] +1 We should release a new version of Shared LDAP for the Studio> 1.1 release
> [ ] +/-0 Abstain
> [ ] -1 We should NOT re= lease a new version of Shared LDAP for the
> Studio 1.1 release
>
> Regards,
> Pierre-Arnaud
>
>
> On Jan = 21, 2008 5:13 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny <elecharny@gmail.com
> <mailto:= elecharny@gmail.com>> wrot= e:
>
>     I'm waiting for the vote. This is just a goo= d example why we need
>     separate subprojects. Hopefully= , shared-ldap and shared-codec is not
>     part of another= project ;)
>
>     Alex Karasulu wrote:
>     > Absolutely just kick off the vote. Although this is= not a
>     sub-project
>     > in itse= lf we can vote on it for release since other projects
>    = depend on it.
>     >
>     > Studio= has just as much a right to push "shared" code releases
>     as does
>     > the server.
> &= nbsp;   >
>     > Alex
>     >= ;
>     > On Jan 21, 2008 11:07 AM, Pierre-Arnaud Marcel= ot
>     <pa@marcelot= .net <mailto:pa@marcelot.net&= gt;
>     > <mai= lto: pa@marcelot.net <mailto:pa@marcelot.net>>> wrote:
&g= t;     >
>     >     Hi Dev,
>     >>     >     As you know, we're in the middle= of a Studio (whether it's a
>     RC or
>  =   >     not) and we're trying to fix as many bugs as= possible.
>     >
>     >     The issue = DIRSTUDIO-266 (OpenLDAP schema files parser fails when
>    = ; >     DESC contains an empty string '') [1] depends = on the Apache
>     >     Directory Shared LDA= P project. This project is mainly used by
>     >     Apache Directory Server but also by A= pache Directory Studio.
>     >
>     &g= t;     As of now, the Studio project has been using this dependen= cy
>     as a
>     >     SNAP= SHOT release, compiling a newest version when a bug was
>     fixed
>     >     in the tr= unk of the project, as new releases of the Shared LDAP
>    = ; >     project only appear when there is a new release of the= Apache
>     >     Directory Server.
>     >
>     >     I was wond= ering if it would make sense to release more often
>     th= e
>     >     Shared LDAP project, when either= the Server or Studio projects
>     >     nee= d it for a release.
>     >
>     >     WDYT ?
= >     >
>     >     Thanks,>     >     Pierre-Arnaud
>     = >
>     >     [1] https://issues.apa= che.org/jira/browse/DIRSTUDIO-266
>     >
>     >
>
>
> =     --
>     --
>     cordialemen= t, regards,
>     Emmanuel L=E9charny
> &= nbsp;   www.iktek.c= om <http://www.ik= tek.com>
>     directory.apache.org <http://directory.apache.org>
>
>
>

------=_Part_23107_20366296.1201777212896--