Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-connectors-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 32818 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2010 18:19:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 29 Nov 2010 18:19:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 202 invoked by uid 500); 29 Nov 2010 18:19:03 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-connectors-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 126 invoked by uid 500); 29 Nov 2010 18:19:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact connectors-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 117 invoked by uid 99); 29 Nov 2010 18:19:02 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 18:19:02 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of daddywri@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.182 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.216.182] (HELO mail-qy0-f182.google.com) (209.85.216.182) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 18:18:54 +0000 Received: by qyk36 with SMTP id 36so1704459qyk.6 for ; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 10:18:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=39jqV11N4Xm5jLb1X6NKkDUgXGWOGmPCpJx24ZxCnlA=; b=XeBrus8a3qw3to02OLO57i/aU0NMgsZ8Gj3rrCuf3wxQpyQLMtSCd8yYwMAHEtGhHC ygOurjqOQuoYsJDY8HkYLTUM2SLGCdXXIgfPNWPb1PGEhffnRwVIENUxMdaTdVALes75 v2nnA8kkeFlLO+TGEpdzYitRr7D5SLP4NwOis= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=N1FiwTHgI2M5d8bZXubrcrtbS8fu1m5JicAY5Q8DxQprIR74936gkLW2ybbcpEff2I OZ2ghWFILMCZlBqYZ6b1eKYecoAJ+mzxQOtjQRmh4GcQezTN6B87+zJhw+z+GNb1mPib SNMJ7o6gQqWcHO64bpNgmoXVTDAJTBDCPm2kk= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.240.144 with SMTP id la16mr5227438qcb.50.1291054712351; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 10:18:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.229.85.70 with HTTP; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 10:18:32 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <3DC2C21E-D669-4417-8D44-03001323856C@apache.org> References: <05D14B106FBA47BEBFF481330D0E01C1@JackKrupansky> <3DC2C21E-D669-4417-8D44-03001323856C@apache.org> Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 13:18:32 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Release? From: Karl Wright To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Great! Has anyone else had a chance to look at RC1 yet? If not, should I offer gift certificates or something to encourage participation? ;-) Karl On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 7:52 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrot= e: > I'll take a look, but it won't likely be until Tuesday (extended Turkey g= oing on here!) > > On Nov 24, 2010, at 8:39 AM, Karl Wright wrote: > >> Uploaded RC1. >> Karl >> >> On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 7:04 AM, Karl Wright wrote: >>> A problem with the FileNet connector has caused me to build an RC1. >>> It's uploading now. >>> >>> Karl >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Jack Krupansky >>> wrote: >>>> That's a great leap forward... RC0 of ManifoldCF 0.1! That's a lot of = the >>>> hardest of the work. >>>> >>>> I'm busy on some other things right now, but maybe next week I can tak= e a >>>> look. >>>> >>>> -- Jack Krupansky >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- From: Karl Wright >>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 1:00 PM >>>> To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org >>>> Subject: Re: Release? >>>> >>>> While I was looking for a solution, an upload attempt succeeded! >>>> >>>> So there is now an RC0 out on people.apache.org/~kwright: >>>> >>>> [kwright@minotaur:~]$ ls -lt manifoldcf-0.1.* >>>> -rw-r--r-- =A01 kwright =A0kwright =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 63 Nov 23 17:57 >>>> manifoldcf-0.1.tar.gz.md5 >>>> -rw-r--r-- =A01 kwright =A0kwright =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 60 Nov 23 17:57 >>>> manifoldcf-0.1.zip.md5 >>>> -rw-r--r-- =A01 kwright =A0kwright =A0158734230 Nov 23 17:55 manifoldc= f-0.1.zip >>>> -rw-r--r-- =A01 kwright =A0kwright =A0156742315 Nov 23 17:06 manifoldc= f-0.1.tar.gz >>>> [kwright@minotaur:~]$ >>>> >>>> Please let me know what you think. >>>> Karl >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Karl Wright wro= te: >>>>> >>>>> The upload has failed repeatedly for me, so I'll clearly have to find >>>>> another way. >>>>> Karl >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:47 AM, Karl Wright wr= ote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm uploading a release candidate now. =A0But someone needs to feed = the >>>>>> hamsters turning the wheels or something, because the upload speed t= o >>>>>> that machine is 51KB/sec, so it's going to take 3 hours to get the >>>>>> candidate up there, if my network connection doesn't bounce in the >>>>>> interim. =A0Is there any other place available? >>>>>> >>>>>> Karl >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 8:34 AM, Grant Ingersoll >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Nov 19, 2010, at 6:18 AM, Karl Wright wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I've created a signing key, and checked in a KEYS file. =A0Apache >>>>>>>> instructions for this are actually decent, so I didn't have to mak= e >>>>>>>> much stuff up. =A0Glad about that. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yep, sorry, have been in meetings. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Last remaining release issue is getting the release files to a >>>>>>>> download mirror. =A0Maybe I can find some doc for that too. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Next steps would be to generate a candidate release which the rest = of us >>>>>>> can download. =A0Put it up on people.apache.org/~YOURUSERNAME/... a= nd then >>>>>>> send a note to the list saying where to locate it. =A0Rather than c= all a vote >>>>>>> right away, just ask us to check it out and try it as there will li= kely be >>>>>>> issues for the first release. =A0Once we all feel we have a decent = candidate, >>>>>>> we can call a vote, which should be a formality. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> See http://apache.org/dev/#releases for more info. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 4:13 AM, Karl Wright >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The build changes are complete. =A0I removed the modules level fr= om the >>>>>>>>> hierarchy because it served no useful purpose and complicated mat= ters. >>>>>>>>> =A0The outer level build.xml now allows you build code, docs, and= run >>>>>>>>> tests separately from one another, and gives you help as a defaul= t. >>>>>>>>> "ant image" builds you the deliverable .zip and tar.gz files. =A0= Online >>>>>>>>> site has been polished so that it now contains complete javadoc, = as >>>>>>>>> does the built and delivered .zip and tar.gz's. =A0In short, =A0w= e *could* >>>>>>>>> actually do a release now, if only we had (and incorporated) the = KEYS >>>>>>>>> file I alluded to earlier, which I do not know how to build or ob= tain. >>>>>>>>> =A0I believe this needs to be both generated and registered. =A0T= he site >>>>>>>>> also needs to refer to a download location/list of mirrors before= it >>>>>>>>> could go out the door. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Help? Grant? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:50 PM, Karl Wright >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hearing nothing, went ahead and made the port of documentation t= o the >>>>>>>>>> site official. =A0I also now include the generated site in the r= elease >>>>>>>>>> tar.gz and .zip. >>>>>>>>>> Issues still to address before release: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> (1) source tar.gz and zip in outer-level build.xml, which I will= try >>>>>>>>>> to address shortly. >>>>>>>>>> (2) vehicle for release downloads, and naming thereof. =A0In sho= rt, >>>>>>>>>> where do I put these things so people can download them?? >>>>>>>>>> (3) Voting procedures for release. =A0I've seen this done as a v= ote in >>>>>>>>>> general@incubator.org - is that actually necessary? >>>>>>>>>> (4) Release branch and tag. =A0Do we want both? =A0What is the c= orrect >>>>>>>>>> naming for each in apache? >>>>>>>>>> (5) Legal requirements. =A0CHANGES.txt, LICENSE.txt, etc. =A0Do = these >>>>>>>>>> need >>>>>>>>>> to be included in the release tar.gz, or just the source tar.gz?= =A0I >>>>>>>>>> suspect both, but please confirm. =A0Also, if there is a typical >>>>>>>>>> organization of the release tar.gz in relation to the source tar= .gz >>>>>>>>>> this would be a good time to make that known. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Karl Wright >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> What I've done here is taken all the pages that I originally pu= t in >>>>>>>>>>> the Wiki, describing how to set up and run ManifoldCF, and conv= erted >>>>>>>>>>> them to xdocs that are part of the ManifoldCF site. =A0These do= cuments >>>>>>>>>>> have no user content other than stuff Grant or I added, accordi= ng to >>>>>>>>>>> their logs, so I feel that is safe to do. =A0I've left the wiki= pages >>>>>>>>>>> around but am thinking we'll want them to go away at some point= . Not >>>>>>>>>>> sure exactly what to do with all the user comments to them, how= ever. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Is this a reasonable way to proceed? =A0We should avoid using t= he wiki >>>>>>>>>>> in the future for documentation, seems to me, but otherwise I c= an >>>>>>>>>>> see >>>>>>>>>>> no issues here. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Grant Ingersoll >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 15, 2010, at 1:23 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't mean to imply that the wiki needs to be physically >>>>>>>>>>>>> included in the release zip/tar, just that snapshotting and v= ersioning of >>>>>>>>>>>>> the wiki should be done, if feasible, so that a user who is o= n an older >>>>>>>>>>>>> release can still see the doc for that release. I am just thi= nking ahead for >>>>>>>>>>>>> future releases. So, 0.1 does not need this right now. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Right, and I'm saying that we can't include user generated con= tent >>>>>>>>>>>> in a release unless we have explicitly asked for permission on= it in the >>>>>>>>>>>> form of patches and then committed by a committer. =A0Since we= don't lock down >>>>>>>>>>>> our wiki, we can't do it. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Grant Ingersoll >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:23 AM >>>>>>>>>>>>> To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Release? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 10, 2010, at 1:22 AM, Jack Krupansky wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> And the wiki doc is also part of the release. Does this stuf= f get >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a version/release as well? Presumably we want doc for curren= tly supported >>>>>>>>>>>>>> releases, and the doc can vary between releases. Can we easi= ly snapshot the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wiki? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You can't put Wiki in a release, as their is no way to track >>>>>>>>>>>>> whether the person has permission to donate it.. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Will we have nightly builds in place? I think a 0.1 can get >>>>>>>>>>>>>> released without a nightly build, but it would be nice to sa= y that we also >>>>>>>>>>>>>> have a "rolling trunk release" which is just the latest buil= d off trunk and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the latest wiki/doc as well. So, some people may want the of= ficial 0.1, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>> others may want to run straight from trunk/nightly build. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Karl Wright >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 1:56 PM >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Release? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Proposal: =A0Release to consist of two things: tar and zip o= f a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> complete >>>>>>>>>>>>>> source tree, and tar and zip of the modules/dist area after = the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> build. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The implied way people are to work with this is: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - to use just the distribution, untar or unzip the distribut= ion >>>>>>>>>>>>>> zip/tar into a work area, and either use the multiprocess >>>>>>>>>>>>>> version, or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the quickstart example. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - to add a connector, untar or unzip the source zip/tar into= a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> work >>>>>>>>>>>>>> area, and integrate your connector into the build. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is this acceptable for a 0.1 release? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Jack Krupansky >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh, I wasn't intending to disparage the RSS or other connec= tors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just giving >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> my own priority list of "must haves." By all means, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "well-supported" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> connector list should be whatever list you want to feel is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> appropriate and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exclude only those where "we" feel that "we" would not be a= ble >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to provide >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sufficient support and assistance online. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That's great that qBase is offering access. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BTW, I was just thinking that maybe we should try to keep l= ogs >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of each >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> connector type in action so that people have a reference to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consult when >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> debugging their own connector-related problems. In other wo= rds, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successful connection session is supposed to look like. So,= have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a test and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its "reference" log. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Karl Wright >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 9:46 AM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Release? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you can claim "well supported" for the web connector, yo= u >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> certainly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be able to claim it for the RSS connector. =A0You co= uld >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reasonably include the JDBC connector because it does not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> require a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proprietary system to test. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But if your definition is that tests exist for all the "wel= l >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supported" ones, somebody has some work to do. =A0I'd like = to see >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a plan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on how we get from where we are now to a more comprehensive= set >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests. =A0I've gotten qBase to agree to let me have access = to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their Q/A >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> infrastructure (which used to be MetaCarta's), but that's o= nly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be helpful for diagnosing problems and doing development= , not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> automated tests that anyone can run. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Jack Krupansky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And one of the issues on the list should be to define the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "well-supported" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> connectors for 0.5 (or whatever) as opposed to the "code i= s >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thought to work, you are on your own for testing/support" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> connectors. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Longer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> term, "we" should get most/all connectors into the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well-supported >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> category, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but I wouldn't use that as the bar for even 1.0. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My personal minimum "well-supported" connector list for a = 0.5 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> system, web, and SharePoint*. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * Oh... there is the issue of SharePoint 2010 or whatever = the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> latest is, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> current MCF support should be good enough for a 0.5 releas= e, I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Got to keep up with Google Connectors!) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Karl Wright >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 9:28 AM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Release? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in favor of a release. =A0I'm not sure, though, what t= he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parameters ought to be. =A0I think the minimum is that we = need to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a release infrastructure and plan, set up a release proces= s, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decide what the release packaging should look like (zip's, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tar's, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sources, deliverables) and where the javadoc will be publi= shed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> online. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (It's possible that we may, for instance, decide to change= the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ant build scripts work to make it easier for people to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proprietary connectors after the fact, for instance. =A0Or= we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> claim that the release is just the sources, either way.) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After that, we need to figure out what tickets we still wa= nt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> done >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> before the release occurs. =A0I'd argue for more testing, = and I'm >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trying to figure out issues pertaining to Documentum and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileNet, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because these connectors require sidecar processes that ar= e not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supported in the example. =A0We could go substantially bey= ond >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree with Jack that 0.1 would be useful if we only get = that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> far. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Jack Krupansky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> At least get a release 0.1 dry-run with code as-is out AS= AP to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flush out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release process issues. This would help to send out a mes= sage >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the rest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the world that MCF is an available product rather than pu= rely >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> development/incubation. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then come up with a list of issues that people strongly f= eel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need to be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resolved before a true, squeaky-clean 1.0 release. Maybe = that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> original list of tasks, including better testing, but som= e >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> review/decisions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are probably needed. That will be the ultimate target. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then decide on a "close enough" subset of issues that wou= ld >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> constitute >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people consider a "solid beta" and target that as a relea= se >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0.5 and focus >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that as the near-term target (after getting 0.1 out ASAP.= ) I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not have any major issues on the top of my head that I wo= uld >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hold out as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "blockers" for a 0.5. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Or, get 0.1 out and then move on to a 0.2, etc. on a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> monthly/bi-monthly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basis as progress is made. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In short, get MCF as-is 0.1 out ASAP, have a very short l= ist >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for MCF 0.5 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get it out reasonably soon, and then revisit what 1.0 rea= lly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> means versus >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0.6, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Grant Ingersoll >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 8:38 AM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Release? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Now that we have NTLM figured out and the Memex stuff beh= ind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> us, how do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people feel about working towards a release? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Grant >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>> Grant Ingersoll >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.lucidimagination.com >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>> Grant Ingersoll >>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.lucidimagination.com >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -------------------------- >>>>>>> Grant Ingersoll >>>>>>> http://www.lucidimagination.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> > > -------------------------- > Grant Ingersoll > http://www.lucidimagination.com/ > > Search the Lucene ecosystem docs using Solr/Lucene: > http://www.lucidimagination.com/search > >