shiro-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kalle Korhonen <kalle.o.korho...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Preparing for our first release
Date Tue, 02 Feb 2010 05:41:44 GMT
Ha! I knew that would get the ball rolling :) I'll take care of
SHIRO-59. Agree with everything Les said - API changes would be
important to get in at this stage. I expect working through the
release preparation will still take a couple of weeks and we probably
have a good chance of closing out all of the remaining ones currently
scheduled in that timeframe - but there's no point holding up the
release if not.

Kalle


On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Les Hazlewood <lhazlewood@apache.org> wrote:
> I definitely agree - there are a few critical issues that I'd like to
> see if we can resolve:
>
> -  The RememberMeManager acquires the HttpServletRequest/Response pair
> from the ThreadLocal - I was thinking that might require an API change
> to the RememberMeManager to accept it as a method argument or in the
> Subject context map.
> - 'Run As' is about 50% done.  It shouldn't take much longer to finish
> - As Brian suggested, his patches would be a nice edition for the 1.0 release.
>
> I agree that most of the other issues won't be done for the 1.0
> release, but that's ok - that's what 1.1 will be for or 1.2 or
> whatever.  It's definitely a good idea to get 1.0 out now to service
> the community's needs.
>
> We're definitely close!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Les
>
> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 10:54 PM, Kalle Korhonen
> <kalle.o.korhonen@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think it's a high time to do our first release. There's quite a few
>> smallish organizational and/or configuration items we need to do
>> before a release, most of them nicely tracked at
>> http://incubator.apache.org/clutch.html. Color-wise, we are not doing
>> that bad but we could do better. Don't care about the all green much
>> but the page is tracking the right items, so I just picked up the
>> hammer and I'll start swinging. I'll be updating the progress here and
>> in case I run into issues. I'll first create the distribution area and
>> publish our site docs there. If there are any open issues any of you
>> would like to get closed before 1.0.0 better start working on them
>> now.. I don't think we are going to wait for all of the issues
>> currently scheduled for 1.0
>> (https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&mode=hide&sorter/order=DESC&sorter/field=priority&resolution=-1&pid=12310950&fixfor=12314078)
>> to be completed unless they are critical/blocker. We'll just schedule
>> them for a later point release if not done until we are otherwise
>> ready for 1.0.0. Agree?
>>
>> Kalle
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Les Hazlewood <lhazlewood@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 4:17 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com>
wrote:
>>>> Done.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Alan
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 18, 2009, at 1:06 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In light of this, could you please resolve the following issue?
>>>>>
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHIRO-41
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Les
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For artwork it can get complicated but only if you received stipulations
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> its usage; it doesn't seem that there is any.  I think we're good
here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Alan
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Dec 16, 2009, at 7:33 AM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is one minor thing I forgot to mention:  Jeremy's friend
created
>>>>>>> the old JSecurity shield/lock logo for us.  He did the logo
for us in
>>>>>>> return for free website hosting on one of our servers.  This
is
>>>>>>> payment for services rendered (he payed us by doing the logo
work, the
>>>>>>> services rendered were the website hosting), so I don't think
that we
>>>>>>> need a CLA/sign-off from him.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As I understand it, the shield/lock logo is our intellectual
property
>>>>>>> due to this agreement and we don't need to involve him.  IANAL,
but I
>>>>>>> think we're ok.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Les
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 10:26 AM, Les Hazlewood <lhazlewood@apache.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yep, it did.  Just for clarity's sake: every contributor
on the old
>>>>>>>> JSecurity project came over as a committer to Apache and
each also
>>>>>>>> sent the re-licensing agreement/affirmation at that time.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Alan D. Cabrera
>>>>>>>> <list@toolazydogs.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So, back in July Craig sent out a set of emails from
committers in the
>>>>>>>>> project stating that re-licensing for ASF.  What I am
not sure of is
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> this covers *all* the original authors from the JSecurity
project
>>>>>>>>> before
>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>> arrived at the Incubator.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Alan
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Dec 8, 2009, at 6:42 AM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Craig, can you please just confirm this so we have
a clear record of
>>>>>>>>>> it?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Alan D. Cabrera
>>>>>>>>>> <list@toolazydogs.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If Craig has confirmed that all the original
authors from JSecurity
>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>> filed a license agreement then I think we're
good.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Alan
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 7, 2009, at 4:58 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Yep, we're covered.  All people who contributed
previously to
>>>>>>>>>>>> JSecurity became committers to Shiro.  Before
joining the
>>>>>>>>>>>> incubator,
>>>>>>>>>>>> we all formally (each) agreed to the transfer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> HTH,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Alan D. Cabrera
>>>>>>>>>>>> <list@toolazydogs.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I recall that agreements were forwarded
by current project
>>>>>>>>>>>>> members.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>  I'm
>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>>>> certain that we covered all the people
who contributed to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> original
>>>>>>>>>>>>> project.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 7, 2009, at 11:40 AM, Les Hazlewood
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To the best of my knowledge this
is all finished - Craig helped
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with it.  I forwarded all the formal
statements from all previous
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> committers that they fully agree
and support of transferring all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their work to the ASF 2.0 license.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Craig, could you please clarify if
there's anything else that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> done?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 1:31 PM, Alan
D. Cabrera
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <list@toolazydogs.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 7, 2009, at 7:44 AM, Les
Hazlewood wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think most people in the
Shiro community would agree that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we're
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> long
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overdue for our first release
;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, to that end, and unless
anyone objects, I'm going to take a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crack
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at tagging only what I feel
are the most important issues that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely must be in to
1.0.  When I'm done with that, I'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> post to this list again to
allow people the opportunity to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> speak-up
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they see something that they
think should be included but I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> missed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm doing this to help us
get a little focus on what should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> concretely
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> define our first release,
and to get it out as soon as possible
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now.  Just my opinion, but
I think it'd be great if we can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finish
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 1.0 issues (if not actually
release) by 1 January.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if anyone
does not agree with this,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get started as soon as possible
organizing the existing issues.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds great!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The only thing that's hazy in
my mind is the LGPL vetting.  I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recall
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effort to obtain permission to
relicense the code from the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> original
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> authors
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but am not sure if it was completed
and all the requisite
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> permissions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> properly filed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message