hc-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Becke <be...@u.washington.edu>
Subject Re: It's not all about hacking (unfortunately)
Date Fri, 23 May 2003 16:14:57 GMT
I heartily agree.  Much work needs to be done with documentation for 

> - Update release_notes.txt (missing 2.0a3 changelog entries)
> Sadly enough, we have been quite sloppy about keeping this file up to
> date. Ideally this file should get updated along the way, as patches
> get committed to the CVS. Now we are facing a rather unpleasant task
> of having to reconstruct the change log for the 2.0a3 and 2.0b1
> releases. But that needs to be done.

Ouch.  This will not be a fun task.  We should be able to get a lot of 
this from bugzilla.

> - Update news.xml
> Add a paragraph on 2.0b1 release

My assumption was that Jeff would do this when he generated the site 
docs.  If we have some time now we might as well take care of it.

> - SSL guide
> SSL guide is needed really badly. There are a few cases where
> HttpClient simply does not work with SSL as expected under specific
> circumstances. All these nuances need to be documented, possible
> workarounds suggested, a roadmap towards a permanent solution clearly
> defined. (This one is probably my duty)

Agreed.  We also need to finish the multi-threading docs.

> - Start working on RELEASE_PLAN_2_1.txt & RELEASE_PLAN_3_0.txt
> We need to clearly articulate our development philosophy and to
> suggest a roadmap for going forward past 2.0 release. We have to let
> the users know what kind of changes & improvements can be expected
> and their respective target releases. I think the time is about right

Yes, I am anxious to start thinking about 2.1+.  Should we try to have 
an IRC session or something of the like to get started?

> - Upgrade commmons-logging.jar 1.0.3
> I have no idea what version of commmons-logging.jar is currently in
> ${httpclient-root}\lib.

We might as well do this now.  I'll commit this if there are no complaints.

> On a more general note, I also want to suggest beta-2 to follow
> beta-1 shortly, as soon as the above-mentioned documents is brought
> to the level and the first imminent wave of bug reports is dealt
> with.

Agreed. Beta-2 should by mostly documentation/cleanup with a few bug 
fixes.  2-3 weeks perhaps?


View raw message