openwhisk-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rodric Rabbah <rod...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenWhisk 0.9.0-incubating
Date Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:32:20 GMT
Thanks Bertrand for the suggestion to modularize the release - I do think
that makes a lot of sense as well.

The way we're vectoring is for the runtimes to be independent and can have
their own lifecycle.
Similarly the CLI and related tooling.
In the long run this will make a lot of sense.


-r


On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 9:08 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacretaz@apache.org
> wrote:

> Hi Vincent,
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 2:53 PM Vincent S Hou <shou@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > ...Does it mean we can try to release one of the 13 modules, like
> openwhisk, or openwhisk-cli, or consolidate
> > all the 13 projects into one for release?...
>
> The former, I would say?
>
> It's probably more convenient for your users and w.r.t release cycles?
>
> For Apache Sling, as an example which is extremely modular, we do lots
> of individual module releases all the time, and about once a year do a
> "big bang" release that includes all core module.
>
> A model like that might be good for OpenWhisk, but as this stage as
> mentioned for a first "training release" it's probably best to stick
> to one typical module to refine the process.
>
> ...
> > * The key can be accessed at https://dist.apache.org/repos/
> dist/dev/incubator/openwhisk/KEYS. You missed "dev/" in your link...
>
> Ah ok, sorry!  Got it now.
>
> > ...* So far the header is not verified with RAT. We have a unitiy repo
> call
> > openwhisk-utility(https://github.com/apache/incubator-
> openwhisk-utilities) to scan all the code. RAT has issues,
> > since I have never got it running correctly in openwhisk. The Travis
> build uses this openwhisk-utility to verify the
> > headers for every incoming commit....
>
> Ok. The "how to I run the utility to verify the license headers"
> question should be answerable with a URL, maybe the docs of that
> utility?
> People will need to be able to run it standalone to do their own
> verifications.
>
> > * RSA private key should have some instructions. We will work on it...
>
> Great
>
> > * We do not release binary this time...
>
> Yes - I was checking for binaries that might have been leftover, saw
> none and that's good!
>
> > * We will look at the .scala code files...
>
> Ok. If the package name change is too disruptive it can be postponed
> for later during incubation, but that needs to be tracked.
>
> > * For README, let me make the build instruction more clear...
>
> Thanks!
>
> I suppose this means this vote is canceled until you have a new
> release candidate?
>
> -Bertrand
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message