hc-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeffrey Dever <jsde...@sympatico.ca>
Subject Re: [REMINDER] HttpClient IRC event - irc log
Date Fri, 28 Feb 2003 01:47:05 GMT
The IRC session we had today went well.  Except that we only captured about 1/4 the discussion
in a logfile (darn buffers).  The big topics of the day were what to do about redirects and
when to create development branches.

The general concensus was that 2.0 beta development should focus on correctness without any
disruptive changes to be released as a full version as its ready.  The cross host redirects
feature that Oleg provided a patch for should be a *next* release item and includes such significant
restructuring that it would qualify for a 3.0 release change.  2.1 should focus on compatability
and stability over large scale change.  The 3.0 branch should be created after 2.0 reaches
beta.

Of course all these points are up for discussion on the mailing list and will have to come
to a vote in accordance with Apache guidelines.

Here is what we captured in the log (Thanks Adrian):


    AJOfOZ: That would encourage people not to start using it directly.
   Jandalf: But 2.1 should still be geared to 2.0 users.  ie: no change in paradigm, as consistant
as possible.  Anything big could go 3.0
            LLyric nods
    LLyric: Absolutely
      Eric: Yes
    LLyric: People expect sub-releases to be reasonably compatible
    AJOfOZ: We would of course then need to add the flexibility to HttpClient that they need.
     MikeB: What would be in 2.1
   Jandalf: MikeB: I don't know.  
    LLyric: Bug fixes, minor updates, etc.
    LLyric: Ditto 2.2 etc.
    LLyric: Maintenence releases
     MikeB: Any features
   Jandalf: If its just maintaince and bug fixes, that can just be 2.0.x
    LLyric: Maybe, if people wanted them, and it was worth backporting from the 3.x code
     MikeB: Yes, if there are no features it should be a 2.0.X.
      Oleg: I am back
      Eric: (offtopic) I'm going to sign off.  Could someone capture the text of the whole
discussion and post it back to the mailing list, so that everyone can see the discussion?
   Jandalf: 2.1 would have to have some features in it to be justified as a minor release.
    AJOfOZ: Eric: I'm logging it and will take care of that.
   Jandalf: Eric: I'm doing that.
      Eric: Excellent - bye.
    AJOfOZ: I'll leave it to Jandalf then. :)
*** Signoff: MikeB (Remote closed the connection)
*** Signoff: Eric ()
*** MikeB (~Michael@ss02.co.us.ibm.com) has joined channel #httpclient
    AJOfOZ: There's actually quite a few bugs slated for the 2.1 release already (mostly new
feature bugs).
     dcook: I would suggest that new features wait until after the interface restructure.
   Jandalf: The other question is when to branch 2.0, 2.1 and 3.0
     MikeB: I think 2.0 soon.  There are many features that are dying to get in to 3.0.
    AJOfOZ: I'd like to see 2.0 beta 1 get out before we branch at least.  That way there's
only bug fixes and docs left before 2.0 final.
   Jandalf: dcook: I agree, but if 3.0 is where the action is, and someone really wants a
feature in 2.x, then thats fine (particularly if they want to provide a patch!)
   Jandalf: AJOfOZ: Yes.  I think we should branch as late as possible.  
     dcook: But even if a patch was provided, rolling out a release takes significant effort.
    AJOfOZ: But the 2.0 branch would be constantly stable so taking a nightly from there won't
be so bad.
    AJOfOZ: And releases would be regular enough that there'd be a final release ready before
most projects using HttpClient ship.
    AJOfOZ: Never perfect but close enough.
     MikeB: I think that's the argument for branching soon.  It will make 2.0 more stable
I think.
    AJOfOZ: For the record: Inadequate HTTP proxy server support in HttpClient. is scheduled
for beta 2.
   Jandalf: MikeB: But I want to avoid everyone working on 3.0 before 2.0 is even released
yet.
     MikeB: True.  There might be a mass exodus.
    AJOfOZ: Once we get beta 1 out the only thing left is bug fixes and docs.  So a maass
exodus won't hurt as much. :)
   Jandalf: But at the same time I don't want to hold anyone back from "scratching an itch"
     MikeB: Yes, I think some are getting anxious.
   Jandalf: So how about we say 3.0 will branch just after 2.0 beta1 is released?
    AJOfOZ: +1
     MikeB: +1
      Oleg: +1
     MikeB: So when is 2.0b1?
    AJOfOZ: There's about 14 bugs in bugzilla scheduled for beta 1.
   Jandalf: I'll takes those votes as agreement, but actual voting will still have to be done
on the mailing list.
    AJOfOZ: A couple of them look fixed though.
    AJOfOZ: Jandalf: Good to hear. :)
     MikeB: Yes, some of them are questionable.
   Jandalf: I'm Apache Compliant.
    AJOfOZ: hehehe
   Jandalf: Bugs: Yes, really Beta 1 is not too far away.  Some of those bugs are less than
one hour of work.
   Jandalf: Most, in fact.
      Oleg: I wish it was the case with 100-continue thingie. I can't even reproduce it. But
it appears to be the only nasty one
     MikeB: It seems quite nasty.
   Jandalf: Right.  That is a difficult one.
     MikeB: Does is happen in HTTPS or HTTPS+Proxy
      Oleg: Jandalf, I need to get going soon. Anything important left to discuss? 
   Jandalf: One thing.
      Oleg: I believe just HTTPS
      Oleg: Go ahead
   Jandalf: I had a plan to rip out the URI classes into a commons subproject.
      Oleg: Oh. Please do so
     MikeB: Would this be a new sandbox project?
   Jandalf: Its motivated by 1) the code is terrible 2) it is useful beyond httpclient 3)
the code is terrible.
   Jandalf: MikeB: could be, might be able to jump right to commons status, as its meets all
the requirements for new projects.
     MikeB: Other than reasons 1 and 3.
   Jandalf: He he.
     MikeB: I should go soon as well.
   Jandalf: License, stability, contributors ...
      Oleg: Greater visibility should help, though. It's been one man show for too long
   Jandalf: So 3.0 will not have a URI class is what this means.
   Jandalf: But we will have it as a dependancy.
      Oleg: Amen
   Jandalf: Before you all go,
   Jandalf: I'm having some trouble understanding the new PMC structure for Apache/Commons.
   Jandalf: But I am working on it.  They are doing some things I don't agree with.  There
seems to be some strange sentiment as well dealing with ... uniqueness.
     MikeB: Unique people?
      Oleg: How does that affect us?
   Jandalf: Like the negative feelings towards IRC, because its not email, not the "Apache
Way"
     MikeB: Conformity.
   Jandalf: If we do nothing, it could be that ONLY PMC members get to vote on releases.
   Jandalf: It takes control out of our hands.
*** Signoff: MikeB (Remote closed the connection)
    AJOfOZ: Jandalf: Is the reorg list open to non-committers now?  I originally followed
the discussions and was cut out when it moved from community to the committers only reorg.
   Jandalf: But all committers can be PMC members, so we can get it back.  It just means that
we have to be involved.
   Jandalf: Dunno.
*** MikeB (~Michael@ss02.co.us.ibm.com) has joined channel #httpclient
   Jandalf: The information is scant on the reorg, it is changing very quick.
   Jandalf: I feel a little coerced into being a PMC member, when in fact I'm just happy doing
what I'm doing.
     MikeB: What are the down sides of becoming one?
   Jandalf: More administration, less code (as far as I can tell)
     MikeB: Who would you be administering other than HttpClient?
   Jandalf: As you may have noticed, I mostly do admin now already, and hardly every get to
code anymore.
   Jandalf: I don't know, its just this general overall responsibility that comes with PMC
status.  
   Jandalf: I can barely keep up with you guys as it is <grin>
    AJOfOZ: The PMC is intended to oversee all of the project they cover (ie: all of Jakarta).
 That load is spread over all the PMC members though.
   Jandalf: Yes, but then I'd (we'd) have to attend PMC meetings (online), watch the PMC list
yadda yadda yadda.
     MikeB: How many PMC people would there be then?  Is there going to be an explosion of
jakarta projects in the near future?
   Jandalf: I just wanted to say that Apache is changing, and I'm concerned about it, but
not currently in much of a position to do anything about it (but an working on that).
    AJOfOZ: It sounds like it might be a good idea for any HttpClient committers who have
the time to subscribe to the reorg list and speak up about their concerns etc.
   Jandalf: According to Sam, all committers should be PMC members.  Which sounds silly, unachieveable,
and undesirable to me.
     MikeB: yes, why have PMC if all committers are PMC.
   Jandalf: AJOfOZ: Yes, absolutely.  I have no special part in Apache.
   Jandalf: MikeB: Dunno, but thats the "vision".
     MikeB: Well.  I need to go.  I'll check out the reorg list and see what's been going
on.
   Jandalf: Groovy.
    AJOfOZ: Yep, time for breakfast methinks.
     MikeB: good chat all.  talk with you later.
    AJOfOZ: Thanks for organising this Jandalf, we got a lot decided.
      Oleg: Guys, got to be going.
   Jandalf: Thanks to everyone for hanging out here for a while.
*** Signoff: MikeB ("ChatZilla 0.8.13c [Mozilla rv:1.3b/20030210]")
   Jandalf: I'll post meeting minutes soon.
*** Oleg has left channel #httpclient ("Client Exiting") 
   Jandalf: Bye for now!



Adrian Sutton wrote:

>Somewhere deep in middle earth a gathering of the great ents begins....
>
>Just a reminder and time zone clarifier that the inagural HttpClient IRC
>event is scheduled to start around about now.  Everyone's invited to join us
>at irc.freenode.net  channel #httpclient.
>
>Adrian Sutton, Software Engineer
>Ephox Corporation
>www.ephox.com
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ortwin Gluck [mailto:ortwin.glueck@nose.ch]
>Sent: Thursday, 27 February 2003 6:44 PM
>To: Commons HttpClient Project
>Subject: Re: HttpClient IRC event - date set
>
>
>Damn, I will be at the climbing wall at that time....
>
>Jeffrey Dever wrote:
>  
>
>>The inagural HttpClient IRC even will be held tomorrow:
>>
>>Date: 20:00-22:00 UTC Thursday Feb 27
>>Server: irc.freenode.net
>>Channel: #httpclient
>>
>>Tenative Agenda:
>>- Middle Earth nicks
>>- Redirect architecture
>>- Branch strategy and timing
>>- URI subproject
>>- general@apache and IRC
>>- anything else
>>
>>Jandalf
>>    
>>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>commons-httpclient-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail:
>commons-httpclient-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-httpclient-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: commons-httpclient-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
>  
>


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