Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-connectors-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 32602 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2010 01:49:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 3 Dec 2010 01:49:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 85567 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2010 01:49:30 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-connectors-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 85530 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2010 01:49:30 -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 85522 invoked by uid 99); 3 Dec 2010 01:49:30 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Dec 2010 01:49:30 +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, 03 Dec 2010 01:49:24 +0000 Received: by qwg5 with SMTP id 5so7630944qwg.6 for ; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 17:49:03 -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=Z1RHB0B3wdADDEOBgAx/CdE31seNkawnMf/iJwLGzEs=; b=PrPU4WbUGfOMp3vZL4qMglA8YS10dp7k0+btN1xYwbQlB974eQI7/oSr0IuSGLKc97 +ZXxSFYxFTF1N+cgPU16WBj0fEUnuEQ6T6YAh4EPrBuXTOUY63FGSD8iFHvQQWDi6HFn +r5H0V/+wQZ3e8qosLdtYPT+mlgv1v5LPh0kM= 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=UApwvgvMDDz2LP+O/7O/UgdMlXqgZopqxve5Pma3aNsWdYKhPX9uwB0feoMRdRihVe QYp7WaGBCMQ4gUlD3Y4novpy0cALBF40YW4ubmH++Qu3auVuijRnO/Gf3q+dQth2jvgL JTC803+IE4vmX/8rDS+WksxexjXSK2b+ZoQwQ= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.241.194 with SMTP id lf2mr689855qcb.164.1291340943666; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 17:49:03 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.229.85.70 with HTTP; Thu, 2 Dec 2010 17:49:03 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <55C26E5D-C90B-4C76-AF43-248221BCADA7@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> Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 20:49:03 -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 ok - I might move it there Karl 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 /x= 1/home/kwright > > FWIW, if you have a public_html directory in your directory and then plac= e 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 manif= oldcf-0.1.tar.gz.md5 >> -rw-r--r-- =A01 kwright =A0kwright =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 60 Nov 23 17:57 manif= oldcf-0.1.zip.md5 >> -rw-r--r-- =A01 kwright =A0kwright =A0158734230 Nov 23 17:55 manifoldcf-= 0.1.zip >> -rw-r--r-- =A01 kwright =A0kwright =A0156742315 Nov 23 17:06 manifoldcf-= 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 wrote= : >>> 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 wrot= e: >>>> I'm uploading a release candidate now. =A0But someone needs to feed th= e >>>> 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 make >>>>>> 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/... and t= hen send a note to the list saying where to locate it. =A0Rather than call = a vote right away, just ask us to check it out and try it as there will lik= ely be issues for the first release. =A0Once we all feel we have a decent c= andidate, 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 wr= ote: >>>>>>> The build changes are complete. =A0I removed the modules level from= the >>>>>>> hierarchy because it served no useful purpose and complicated matte= rs. >>>>>>> =A0The outer level build.xml now allows you build code, docs, and r= un >>>>>>> tests separately from one another, and gives you help as a default. >>>>>>> "ant image" builds you the deliverable .zip and tar.gz files. =A0On= line >>>>>>> site has been polished so that it now contains complete javadoc, as >>>>>>> does the built and delivered .zip and tar.gz's. =A0In short, =A0we = *could* >>>>>>> actually do a release now, if only we had (and incorporated) the KE= YS >>>>>>> file I alluded to earlier, which I do not know how to build or obta= in. >>>>>>> =A0I believe this needs to be both generated and registered. =A0The= site >>>>>>> also needs to refer to a download location/list of mirrors before i= t >>>>>>> could go out the door. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Help? Grant? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:50 PM, Karl Wright w= rote: >>>>>>>> Hearing nothing, went ahead and made the port of documentation to = the >>>>>>>> site official. =A0I also now include the generated site in the rel= ease >>>>>>>> tar.gz and .zip. >>>>>>>> Issues still to address before release: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> (1) source tar.gz and zip in outer-level build.xml, which I will t= ry >>>>>>>> to address shortly. >>>>>>>> (2) vehicle for release downloads, and naming thereof. =A0In short= , >>>>>>>> where do I put these things so people can download them?? >>>>>>>> (3) Voting procedures for release. =A0I've seen this done as a vot= e in >>>>>>>> general@incubator.org - is that actually necessary? >>>>>>>> (4) Release branch and tag. =A0Do we want both? =A0What is the cor= rect >>>>>>>> naming for each in apache? >>>>>>>> (5) Legal requirements. =A0CHANGES.txt, LICENSE.txt, etc. =A0Do th= ese 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.g= z >>>>>>>> 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 put = in >>>>>>>>> the Wiki, describing how to set up and run ManifoldCF, and conver= ted >>>>>>>>> them to xdocs that are part of the ManifoldCF site. =A0These docu= ments >>>>>>>>> have no user content other than stuff Grant or I added, according= to >>>>>>>>> their logs, so I feel that is safe to do. =A0I've left the wiki p= ages >>>>>>>>> around but am thinking we'll want them to go away at some point. = =A0Not >>>>>>>>> sure exactly what to do with all the user comments to them, howev= er. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 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 inc= luded 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 futur= e releases. So, 0.1 does not need this right now. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Right, and I'm saying that we can't include user generated conte= nt 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 stuff = get a version/release as well? Presumably we want doc for currently support= ed releases, and the doc can vary between releases. Can we easily snapshot = the wiki? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You can't put Wiki in a release, as their is no way to track wh= ether the person has permission to donate it.. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Will we have nightly builds in place? I think a 0.1 can get re= leased without a nightly build, but it would be nice to say that we also ha= ve a "rolling trunk release" which is just the latest build off trunk and t= he 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. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- 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 th= e build. >>>>>>>>>>>> The implied way people are to work with this is: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - to use just the distribution, untar or unzip the distributio= n >>>>>>>>>>>> zip/tar into a work area, and either use the multiprocess vers= ion, 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 connecto= rs, 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 ap= propriate and >>>>>>>>>>>>> exclude only those where "we" feel that "we" would not be abl= e 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 log= s of each >>>>>>>>>>>>> connector type in action so that people have a reference to c= onsult when >>>>>>>>>>>>> debugging their own connector-related problems. In other word= s, what a >>>>>>>>>>>>> successful connection session is supposed to look like. So, h= ave 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, you = certainly >>>>>>>>>>>>> should be able to claim it for the RSS connector. =A0You coul= d also >>>>>>>>>>>>> reasonably include the JDBC connector because it does not req= uire a >>>>>>>>>>>>> proprietary system to test. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> But if your definition is that tests exist for all the "well >>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 s= et 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 onl= y 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 "w= ell-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" co= nnectors. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Longer >>>>>>>>>>>>>> term, "we" should get most/all connectors into the well-supp= orted >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 th= e latest is, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> but >>>>>>>>>>>>>> current MCF support should be good enough for a 0.5 release,= 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 ne= ed to build >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a release infrastructure and plan, set up a release process,= and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> decide what the release packaging should look like (zip's, t= ar's, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sources, deliverables) and where the javadoc will be publish= ed online. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (It's possible that we may, for instance, decide to change t= he way >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ant build scripts work to make it easier for people to b= uild the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> proprietary connectors after the fact, for instance. =A0Or w= e could >>>>>>>>>>>>>> claim that the release is just the sources, either way.) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> After that, we need to figure out what tickets we still want= done >>>>>>>>>>>>>> before the release occurs. =A0I'd argue for more testing, an= d I'm also >>>>>>>>>>>>>> trying to figure out issues pertaining to Documentum and Fil= eNet, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> because these connectors require sidecar processes that are = not well >>>>>>>>>>>>>> supported in the example. =A0We could go substantially beyon= d that, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree with Jack that 0.1 would be useful if we only get th= at 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 ASAP= to flush out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release process issues. This would help to send out a messa= ge to the rest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the world that MCF is an available product rather than pure= ly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> development/incubation. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then come up with a list of issues that people strongly fee= l need to be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resolved before a true, squeaky-clean 1.0 release. Maybe th= at is the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> original list of tasks, including better testing, but some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> review/decisions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are probably needed. That will be the ultimate target. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 woul= d hold out as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "blockers" for a 0.5. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Or, get 0.1 out and then move on to a 0.2, etc. on a monthl= y/bi-monthly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basis as progress is made. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In short, get MCF as-is 0.1 out ASAP, have a very short lis= t for MCF 0.5 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get it out reasonably soon, and then revisit what 1.0 reall= y 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 behin= d 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 > >