Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-connectors-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 51463 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2010 11:16:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 10 Dec 2010 11:16:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 36515 invoked by uid 500); 10 Dec 2010 11:16:18 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-connectors-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 36433 invoked by uid 500); 10 Dec 2010 11:16:16 -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 36425 invoked by uid 99); 10 Dec 2010 11:16:15 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 11:16:15 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of daddywri@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.47 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.216.47] (HELO mail-qw0-f47.google.com) (209.85.216.47) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 11:16:10 +0000 Received: by qwg5 with SMTP id 5so3630267qwg.6 for ; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 03:15:49 -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=/AKPVfYOmp1mlL/6+t8rKeKjGHZbo1Ke8YLTZFo4Duc=; b=lsrV0sqwd9nVphuIOQsr8TmKJTss1JGlspgzuDpf+PZ5yl2nPZZLflK1/0tywNSs3i GQxuQmKx10SVpqJ3a7JmzQ+/LLYNLRzsPnhSl5wAcvKNoVNK6iXQdgHSrtKAP/hQBpZ+ P0Fn99djb9pjXdj20ZBILRlwZ33LEb2+qn6Og= 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=XQEByVL6MUDRzbax7E51hRJNkXN/56D3O6DVbRAmdBozeILbfXQGKAGrgfsr+Lkfvh hTpUHHb2ITYIXIM3weTuRaY2Bg4jfDCKga8oQeRqKqyGt7/LRpgfT08G6xYxZd4Qz4Yx qkma1evQGPRPqt4ERKBvCKU+lOGqzcitmnXYg= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.224.212 with SMTP id ip20mr520531qcb.278.1291979749210; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 03:15:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.229.85.70 with HTTP; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 03:15:48 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <56CD890C-6200-4AE5-9092-B7F18DAAE502@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> <55C26E5D-C90B-4C76-AF43-248221BCADA7@apache.org> <56CD890C-6200-4AE5-9092-B7F18DAAE502@apache.org> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 06:15:48 -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 I've given a first whack at (2) and (3) now. It would be great for someone to review these to see if I missed anything vital. (Robert, I figured we could compare and contrast, and see if we seem to have the same stuff). Thanks, Karl 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. =A0I did get = it to compile. > > Notes: > > 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. =A0All licenses for those libs need to be appended on to the end of th= e 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? =A0Maybe we don't need to= ship both PDF and HTML for the docs. =A0Anything else we can trim? > 6. What's json/org/json all about? > 7. I still see Memex stuff in connectors dir. =A0I didn't check other pla= ces. > 8. We should hook in RAT (see Solr's build file) to verify that all sourc= e files have appropriate license headers > > Other than that, some other eyes on it would be good. > > -Grant > > On Dec 2, 2010, at 8:51 PM, Karl Wright wrote: > >> Done >> Karl >> >> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 8:49 PM, Karl Wright wrote: >>> ok - I might move it there >>> Karl >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 8:31 PM, Grant Ingersoll w= rote: >>>> Weird, ~kwright doesn't resolve for me on people.a.o, but I can get to= /x1/home/kwright >>>> >>>> FWIW, if you have a public_html directory in your directory and then p= lace the files there, everyone can download them and check them out at http= ://people.apache.org/~kwright/ >>>> >>>> -Grant >>>> >>>> On Nov 23, 2010, at 1:00 PM, Karl Wright wrote: >>>> >>>>> 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 ma= nifoldcf-0.1.tar.gz.md5 >>>>> -rw-r--r-- =A01 kwright =A0kwright =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 60 Nov 23 17:57 ma= nifoldcf-0.1.zip.md5 >>>>> -rw-r--r-- =A01 kwright =A0kwright =A0158734230 Nov 23 17:55 manifold= cf-0.1.zip >>>>> -rw-r--r-- =A01 kwright =A0kwright =A0156742315 Nov 23 17:06 manifold= cf-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 wr= ote: >>>>>> The upload has failed repeatedly for me, so I'll clearly have to fin= d >>>>>> another way. >>>>>> Karl >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:47 AM, Karl Wright w= rote: >>>>>>> I'm uploading a release candidate now. =A0But 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. =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 ma= ke >>>>>>>>> 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/... an= d then send a note to the list saying where to locate it. =A0Rather than ca= ll a vote right away, just ask us to check it out and try it as there will = likely be issues for the first release. =A0Once we all feel we have a decen= t 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 f= rom the >>>>>>>>>> hierarchy because it served no useful purpose and complicated ma= tters. >>>>>>>>>> =A0The outer level build.xml now allows you build code, docs, an= d run >>>>>>>>>> tests separately from one another, and gives you help as a defau= lt. >>>>>>>>>> "ant image" builds you the deliverable .zip and tar.gz files. = =A0Online >>>>>>>>>> site has been polished so that it now contains complete javadoc,= as >>>>>>>>>> does the built and delivered .zip and tar.gz's. =A0In short, =A0= 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 o= btain. >>>>>>>>>> =A0I believe this needs to be both generated and registered. =A0= The site >>>>>>>>>> also needs to refer to a download location/list of mirrors befor= e 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 = to the >>>>>>>>>>> site official. =A0I also now include the generated site in the = release >>>>>>>>>>> tar.gz and .zip. >>>>>>>>>>> Issues still to address before release: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> (1) source tar.gz and zip in outer-level build.xml, which I wil= l try >>>>>>>>>>> to address shortly. >>>>>>>>>>> (2) vehicle for release downloads, and naming thereof. =A0In sh= ort, >>>>>>>>>>> where do I put these things so people can download them?? >>>>>>>>>>> (3) Voting procedures for release. =A0I've seen this done as a = vote in >>>>>>>>>>> general@incubator.org - is that actually necessary? >>>>>>>>>>> (4) Release branch and tag. =A0Do we want both? =A0What is the = correct >>>>>>>>>>> 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 typica= l >>>>>>>>>>> organization of the release tar.gz in relation to the source ta= r.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 p= ut in >>>>>>>>>>>> the Wiki, describing how to set up and run ManifoldCF, and con= verted >>>>>>>>>>>> them to xdocs that are part of the ManifoldCF site. =A0These d= ocuments >>>>>>>>>>>> have no user content other than stuff Grant or I added, accord= ing to >>>>>>>>>>>> their logs, so I feel that is safe to do. =A0I've left the wik= i pages >>>>>>>>>>>> around but am thinking we'll want them to go away at some poin= t. =A0Not >>>>>>>>>>>> sure exactly what to do with all the user comments to them, ho= wever. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is this a reasonable way to proceed? =A0We should avoid using = the wiki >>>>>>>>>>>> in the future for documentation, seems to me, but otherwise I = can 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 versioning of t= he wiki should be done, if feasible, so that a user who is on an older rele= ase can still see the doc for that release. I am just thinking ahead for fu= ture releases. So, 0.1 does not need this right now. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Right, and I'm saying that we can't include user generated co= ntent 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 lo= ck 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 stu= ff get a version/release as well? Presumably we want doc for currently supp= orted releases, and the doc can vary between releases. Can we easily snapsh= ot 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 say that we also= have a "rolling trunk release" which is just the latest build off trunk an= d the latest wiki/doc as well. So, some people may want the official 0.1, b= ut 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 = 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: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - to use just the distribution, untar or unzip the distribu= tion >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> zip/tar into a work area, and either use the multiprocess v= ersion, or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the quickstart example. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - to add a connector, untar or unzip the source zip/tar int= o 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 conne= ctors, just giving >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> my own priority list of "must haves." By all means, the "w= ell-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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That's great that qBase is offering access. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 t= o consult when >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> debugging their own connector-related problems. In other w= ords, 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, y= ou certainly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be able to claim it for the RSS connector. =A0You c= ould 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 "we= ll >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 comprehensiv= e 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 = only going >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be helpful for diagnosing problems and doing developmen= t, 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 = 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-s= upported >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 relea= se, 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 = the release >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parameters ought to be. =A0I think the minimum is that we= need to build >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a release infrastructure and plan, set up a release proce= ss, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decide what the release packaging should look like (zip's= , tar's, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sources, deliverables) and where the javadoc will be publ= ished online. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (It's possible that we may, for instance, decide to chang= e the way >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ant build scripts work to make it easier for people t= o build the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proprietary connectors after the fact, for instance. =A0O= r we could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> claim that the release is just the sources, either way.) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After that, we need to figure out what tickets we still w= ant 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 a= re not well >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supported in the example. =A0We could go substantially be= yond 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 A= SAP to flush out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release process issues. This would help to send out a me= ssage to the rest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the world that MCF is an available product rather than p= urely >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> development/incubation. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 so= me >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> review/decisions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are probably needed. That will be the ultimate target. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then decide on a "close enough" subset of issues that wo= uld constitute >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people consider a "solid beta" and target that as a rele= ase 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 w= ould hold out as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "blockers" for a 0.5. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Or, get 0.1 out and then move on to a 0.2, etc. on a mon= thly/bi-monthly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basis as progress is made. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 re= ally 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 be= hind 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 >>>> >>>> >>> > > -------------------------- > Grant Ingersoll > http://www.lucidimagination.com > >