felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Upayavira ...@odoko.co.uk>
Subject Re: Initial Felix release (was Re: [status] Installers (Inno, RPM, Pkg, IzPack))
Date Thu, 02 Mar 2006 20:13:18 GMT
Richard S. Hall wrote:
> I think Alex was pointing to example installers for Directory, not
> Felix, but that does raise an issue that I have been meaning to post for
> a week or so now.
> I think it is very important that we get an easily
> downloaded/installable release of Felix out the door as soon as
> possible...actually, it is long overdue. :-(
> Of the outstanding issues for Felix, my original thinking was that I
> wanted to target re-enabling security before making a public release.
> However, my mind has been changed on this and I now think we should
> target fixing security in the next public release.
> I think we are ready with a stable, usable Felix release right now. In
> the last two months there have been a lot of changes to Felix, such as:
>    * Complete refactoring of the Module Loader layer to provide better
>      modularity abstractions to support OSGi R4 features; there are
>      still a few more things to be done here, but overall it is in good
>      shape.
>    * Implemented support for directories on the class path.
>    * Implemented support for Bundle.getEntry()/getEntryPaths().
>    * Implemented support for installing bundles by reference and as
>      exploded JAR files.
>    * Improved several concurrency issues to lessen the possibility of
>      deadlocks.
>    * Fixed some low-level bugs/issues, some of which were around since
>      the Oscar days, like improperly handling the order of bundle class
>      path entries and ensuring that embedded JAR names do not clash.
>    * Added many minor bug fixes too.
> And these changes are only in the last two months, there are many more
> improvements before then (like the rewriting of the URL Handlers service
> to support multiple framework instances). I am confident to say that
> Felix is ready for more wide-scale usage. This means that we need to
> make a public release.
> Currently, Felix reports itself as 0.7.0...I think we should follow a
> release model where odd numbered point releases are experimental and
> even numbered point releases are stable. I propose that we declare the
> next release to be 0.8.0, with the subsequent development occurring in
> 0.9.0, followed by the 1.0.0 release.
> I have one outstanding thing that I would like to commit for the 0.8.0
> release, which is some experimentation that I have been doing with OBR.
> This should be done within a week (unfortunately, I have had some other
> priorities or else this would be done already), but we could even go
> ahead without it.
> If people have familiarity with making releases here at Apache, your
> input would be greatly appreciated, because this is all new to me.
> Comments and suggestions are encouraged. Let's get this thing out the
> door ASAP.

As I understand it, the main thing is that we mark it as 'incubating' in
the relevant places, e.g. in the filename.

You get a release zip/tgz ready, I'll work out what needs to be done to
do it properly :-)

Regards, Upayavira

View raw message