river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig L Russell <Craig.Russ...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: River-261, namespace change
Date Mon, 10 Nov 2008 23:22:22 GMT
Just a few thoughts on the process...

In order to graduate, River needs to have a community of committers  
who know how to design, build, test, and release code "the Apache  
way". So there are both building code and growing the community  
activities to accomplish.

Seems to me that getting a reasonable AR2 shipped is priority 1,  
followed by migrating the package names, and building a release.next  
that has the Apache branding (package naming, documentation).

So let's focus on what's needed for AR2 including getting "patches  
that have not been committed yet" into the repository.

Craig

On Nov 10, 2008, at 5:14 AM, Jools wrote:

> Personally I'd like to see the change sooner, rather than later.
>
> If it's a blocker for graduation, then I think we should take it as  
> a high
> priority.
>
> --Jools
>
>
> 2008/11/10 Mark Brouwer <mark.brouwer@marbro.org>
>
>> Hi Dennis,
>>
>> Good to see you want to contribute, but personally I'm not that fond
>> of this rather big change for AR2. There are some patches that have
>> not been committed yet and that are subject to this change as well.
>> There are some rather large changes to the codebase that I'm not  
>> going
>> to get in before AR2 and that would be much harder to merge with the
>> River codebase once RIVER-261 has been committed.
>>
>> I realize that RIVER-261 needs to be done before graduation, but
>> personally I would prefer it to do it once we have proofed that we
>> have   a community that can graduate. RIVER-261 doesn't bring added
>> value to the codebase itself, although no doubt some will think
>> differently, but
>> will have a lot of consequences. At least going forward with  
>> RIVER-261
>> at this stage would disconnect me completely with River given the
>> limited time I have for the time being.
>>
>> People could utilize AR1 as drop in replacement for the JTSK  
>> releases,
>> if RIVER-261 is part of AR2 it can't act as such when this is  
>> committed.
>>
>> Curious to know how others feel about this ...
>> --
>> Mark Brouwer
>>
>>

Craig L Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!


Mime
View raw message