Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-connectors-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 24543 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2010 20:49:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 6 Dec 2010 20:49:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 50650 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2010 20:49:57 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-connectors-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 50608 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2010 20:49:57 -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 50600 invoked by uid 99); 6 Dec 2010 20:49:57 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 06 Dec 2010 20:49:57 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.9] (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Mon, 06 Dec 2010 20:49:55 +0000 Received: (qmail 24138 invoked by uid 99); 6 Dec 2010 20:49:35 -0000 Received: from localhost.apache.org (HELO [192.168.6.88]) (127.0.0.1) (smtp-auth username gsingers, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 06 Dec 2010 20:49:35 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Subject: Re: Release? From: Grant Ingersoll In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 15:48:59 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1E8AADAF-232C-4426-A5E0-935A3E3E8DAB@apache.org> References: <6BB3FB84-AF4E-4E7F-80A1-17F9E80DB2D5@apache.org> <5F9A6C381D444589BC97CA1192594CDC@JackKrupansky> <194D8C61B2FE47C4AB9AF6D75D26AEF4@JackKrupansky> <998CF8FF233A473A85FAD8D190B7CFB0@JackKrupansky> <98B9252C244C4F8ABAA3250B467E41BF@JackKrupansky> <86BCDBC2-2FE4-40FF-BA45-F5DB80DB8BD3@apache.org> <56CD890C-6200-4AE5-9092-B7F18DAAE502@apache.org> <81614BC4-4E9D-4870-A1B3-A5003DF7CE7F@apache.org> To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) Typically, the practice is that the name of the file is the name of the = directory, but I don't know that it has to be. Just easier, since you = only need one Ant variable. -Grant On Dec 6, 2010, at 3:10 PM, Karl Wright wrote: > Does this also apply to the top-level directory in the tar or zip as > well? or can that be left as "apache-manifoldcf-0.1"? >=20 > Karl >=20 > On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Grant Ingersoll = wrote: >> FYI, I think the package name needs to have the words incubating in = it too, as in manifoldcf-0.1-incubating.tar.gz >>=20 >> -Grant >> On Dec 6, 2010, at 8:55 AM, Karl Wright wrote: >>=20 >>> ... going twice ... >>>=20 >>> Karl >>>=20 >>> On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Karl Wright = wrote: >>>> I'm done with (1), (4), and (5). Still waiting for help with (2) = and >>>> (3)... going once.... >>>>=20 >>>> Karl >>>>=20 >>>> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 10:02 PM, Karl Wright = wrote: >>>>> OK, so I will do the appropriate things to make (1), (4), and = maybe >>>>> (5) happen. Does anyone want to help with (2), (3), and (8)? >>>>> Karl >>>>>=20 >>>>> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 9:59 PM, Grant Ingersoll = wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> On Dec 2, 2010, at 9:54 PM, Karl Wright wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Hi Grant, >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> In offline conversation you clarified that for (1) you are = looking for >>>>>>> the top level dir in the zip/tar to be named = "apache-manifoldcf-0.1". >>>>>>> You also seem to be asking for a number of other fixes that are >>>>>>> specific to a release, that I presume would NOT be in sources on = trunk >>>>>>> (e.g. CHANGES.txt). Are you envisioning that we make these = specific >>>>>>> changes in the release branch only? >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> It's perfectly fine for CHANGES.txt to be on trunk. You make the = change marking it as 0.1. Once the release is out, you add a new = section at the top for trunk again. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Later, as we mature, we will likely have branches, etc. for this = stuff, but for now let's just assume trunk is under code freeze and the = only changes that can be made are those related to release. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 9:45 PM, Grant Ingersoll = wrote: >>>>>>>> We're close, but I think we've got a few more things to do. I = did get it to compile. >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Notes: >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> 1. We should package the stuff all under apache-manifold-0.1 so = that when we unzip it's all in one folder. >>>>>>>> 2. Many of the libs require an entry in the NOTICE.txt file >>>>>>>> 3. All licenses for those libs need to be appended on to the = end of the LICENSE.txt file (See Solr's for instance) >>>>>>>> 4. The CHANGES.txt file should reflect that it is a release and = not trunk (not critical to fix) >>>>>>>> 5. Is there anyway to make the package smaller? Maybe we don't = need to ship both PDF and HTML for the docs. Anything else we can trim? >>>>>>>> 6. What's json/org/json all about? >>>>>>>> 7. I still see Memex stuff in connectors dir. I didn't check = other places. >>>>>>>> 8. We should hook in RAT (see Solr's build file) to verify that = all source files have appropriate license headers >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Other than that, some other eyes on it would be good. >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> -Grant >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> On Dec 2, 2010, at 8:51 PM, Karl Wright wrote: >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Done >>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 8:49 PM, Karl Wright = wrote: >>>>>>>>>> ok - I might move it there >>>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 8:31 PM, Grant Ingersoll = wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Weird, ~kwright doesn't resolve for me on people.a.o, but I = can get to /x1/home/kwright >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> FWIW, if you have a public_html directory in your directory = and then place the files there, everyone can download them and check = them out at http://people.apache.org/~kwright/ >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> -Grant >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 23, 2010, at 1:00 PM, Karl Wright wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> While I was looking for a solution, an upload attempt = succeeded! >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> So there is now an RC0 out on people.apache.org/~kwright: >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> [kwright@minotaur:~]$ ls -lt manifoldcf-0.1.* >>>>>>>>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 kwright kwright 63 Nov 23 17:57 = manifoldcf-0.1.tar.gz.md5 >>>>>>>>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 kwright kwright 60 Nov 23 17:57 = manifoldcf-0.1.zip.md5 >>>>>>>>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 kwright kwright 158734230 Nov 23 17:55 = manifoldcf-0.1.zip >>>>>>>>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 kwright kwright 156742315 Nov 23 17:06 = manifoldcf-0.1.tar.gz >>>>>>>>>>>> [kwright@minotaur:~]$ >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know what you think. >>>>>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Karl Wright = wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> The upload has failed repeatedly for me, so I'll clearly = have to find >>>>>>>>>>>>> another way. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:47 AM, Karl Wright = wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm uploading a release candidate now. But someone needs = to feed the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> hamsters turning the wheels or something, because the = upload speed to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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. Is there any other place available? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 8:34 AM, Grant Ingersoll = wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 19, 2010, at 6:18 AM, Karl Wright wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've created a signing key, and checked in a KEYS file. = Apache >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instructions for this are actually decent, so I didn't = have to make >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much stuff up. Glad about that. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yep, sorry, have been in meetings. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Last remaining release issue is getting the release = files to a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> download mirror. Maybe I can find some doc for that = too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Next steps would be to generate a candidate release = which the rest of us can download. Put it up on = people.apache.org/~YOURUSERNAME/... and then send a note to the list = saying where to locate it. Rather than call a vote right away, just ask = us to check it out and try it as there will likely be issues for the = first release. Once we all feel we have a decent candidate, we can call = a vote, which should be a formality. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> See http://apache.org/dev/#releases for more info. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 4:13 AM, Karl Wright = wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The build changes are complete. I removed the modules = level from the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hierarchy because it served no useful purpose and = complicated matters. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The outer level build.xml now allows you build code, = docs, and run >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests separately from one another, and gives you help = as a default. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "ant image" builds you the deliverable .zip and tar.gz = files. Online >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> site has been polished so that it now contains = complete javadoc, as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does the built and delivered .zip and tar.gz's. In = short, we *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 obtain. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I believe this needs to be both generated and = registered. The site >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also needs to refer to a download location/list of = mirrors before it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could go out the door. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Help? Grant? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:50 PM, Karl Wright = wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hearing nothing, went ahead and made the port of = documentation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> site official. I also now include the generated site = in the release >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tar.gz and .zip. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Issues still to address before release: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (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. In short, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where do I put these things so people can download = them?? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (3) Voting procedures for release. I've seen this = done as a vote in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> general@incubator.org - is that actually necessary? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (4) Release branch and tag. Do we want both? What = is the correct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> naming for each in apache? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (5) Legal requirements. CHANGES.txt, LICENSE.txt, = etc. Do these need >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be included in the release tar.gz, or just the = source tar.gz? I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suspect both, but please confirm. Also, 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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 put in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Wiki, describing how to set up and run = ManifoldCF, and converted >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them to xdocs that are part of the ManifoldCF site. = These documents >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have no user content other than stuff Grant or I = added, according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their logs, so I feel that is safe to do. I'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, however. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is this a reasonable way to proceed? We should = avoid using the wiki >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the future for documentation, seems to me, but = otherwise I can see >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no issues here. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Grant Ingersoll = wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 15, 2010, at 1:23 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't mean to imply that the wiki needs to be = physically included in the release zip/tar, just that snapshotting and = versioning of the wiki should be done, if feasible, so that a user who = is on an older release can still see the doc for that release. I am just = thinking ahead for future releases. So, 0.1 does not need this right = now. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Right, and I'm saying that we can't include user = generated content in a release unless we have explicitly asked for = permission on it in the form of patches and then committed by a = committer. Since we don't lock down our wiki, we can't do it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Grant Ingersoll >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:23 AM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Release? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 10, 2010, at 1:22 AM, Jack Krupansky wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And the wiki doc is also part of the release. = Does this stuff get a version/release as well? Presumably we want doc = for currently supported releases, and the doc can vary between releases. = Can we easily snapshot the wiki? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You can't put Wiki in a release, as their is no = way to track whether the person has permission to donate it.. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 = say that we also have a "rolling trunk release" which is just the latest = build off trunk and the latest wiki/doc as well. So, some people may = want the official 0.1, but others may want to run straight from = trunk/nightly build. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Karl Wright >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 1:56 PM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Release? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Proposal: Release to consist of two things: tar = and zip of 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: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - to use just the distribution, untar or unzip = the distribution >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is this acceptable for a 0.1 release? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Jack Krupansky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh, I wasn't intending to disparage the RSS or = other connectors, 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 able to provide >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sufficient support and assistance online. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That's great that qBase is offering access. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BTW, I was just thinking that maybe we should = try to keep logs of each >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> connector type in action so that people have a = reference to consult when >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> debugging their own connector-related problems. = In other words, what a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successful connection session is supposed to = look like. So, have a test and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its "reference" log. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Karl Wright >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 9:46 AM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Release? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you can claim "well supported" for the web = connector, you certainly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be able to claim it for the RSS = connector. You could also >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reasonably include the JDBC connector because it = does not require a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proprietary system to test. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But if your definition is that tests exist for = all the "well >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supported" ones, somebody has some work to do. = I'd like to see a plan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on how we get from where we are now to a more = comprehensive set of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests. I've gotten qBase to agree to let me = have access to their Q/A >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> infrastructure (which used to be MetaCarta's), = but that's only going >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be helpful for diagnosing problems and doing = development, not for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> automated tests that anyone can run. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Jack Krupansky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 is 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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My personal minimum "well-supported" connector = list for a 0.5 would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> system, web, and SharePoint*. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * 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 release, I think. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Got to keep up with Google Connectors!) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Karl Wright >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 9:28 AM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Release? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in favor of a release. I'm not sure, = though, what the release >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parameters ought to be. I think the minimum is = that we need to build >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a release infrastructure and plan, set up a = release process, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decide what the release packaging should look = like (zip's, tar's, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sources, deliverables) and where the javadoc = will be published 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. Or we could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> claim that the release is just the sources, = either way.) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After that, we need to figure out what tickets = we still want done >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> before the release occurs. I'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 are not well >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supported in the example. We could go = substantially beyond that, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree with Jack that 0.1 would be useful if = we only get that far. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Jack Krupansky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> At least get a release 0.1 dry-run with code = as-is out ASAP to flush out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release process issues. This would help to = send out a message to the rest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the world that MCF is an available product = rather than purely >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> development/incubation. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then come up with a list of issues that people = strongly feel need to be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resolved before a true, squeaky-clean 1.0 = release. Maybe that is the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> original list of tasks, including better = testing, but some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> review/decisions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are probably needed. That will be the ultimate = target. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then decide on a "close enough" subset of = issues that would constitute >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people consider a "solid beta" and target that = as a release 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 would hold out as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "blockers" for a 0.5. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Or, get 0.1 out and then move on to a 0.2, = etc. on a monthly/bi-monthly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basis as progress is made. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In short, get MCF as-is 0.1 out ASAP, have a = very short list for MCF 0.5 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get it out reasonably soon, and then revisit = what 1.0 really means versus >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0.6, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Grant = Ingersoll >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 8:38 AM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Release? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Now that we have NTLM figured out and the = Memex stuff behind us, how do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people feel about working towards a release? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Grant >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Grant Ingersoll >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.lucidimagination.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Grant Ingersoll >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.lucidimagination.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Grant Ingersoll >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.lucidimagination.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>> Grant Ingersoll >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.lucidimagination.com >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> -------------------------- >>>>>>>> Grant Ingersoll >>>>>>>> http://www.lucidimagination.com >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> -------------------------- >>>>>> Grant Ingersoll >>>>>> http://www.lucidimagination.com >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>=20 >> -------------------------- >> Grant Ingersoll >> http://www.lucidimagination.com/ >>=20 >> Search the Lucene ecosystem docs using Solr/Lucene: >> http://www.lucidimagination.com/search >>=20 >>=20 -------------------------- Grant Ingersoll http://www.lucidimagination.com/ Search the Lucene ecosystem docs using Solr/Lucene: http://www.lucidimagination.com/search