taverna-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>
Subject Taverna release plan
Date Wed, 17 Feb 2016 01:14:17 GMT
Here's what I propose is the release plan and which I would appreciate
your views on:

Two blocks of release candidates that we vote over.  First one should
be quite straight forward.


First block:

taverna-maven-parent 2-incubating
taverna-language 0.15.1-incubating
taverna-osgi 0.2.1-incubating


Second block:

taverna-engine 3.1.0-incubating
taverna-common-activities 2.1.0-incubating
taverna-commandline 3.1.0-incubating


I think the first block should be ready to go already, so as pointed
out by Gale I don't think there's any reason to wait before making a
release candidate here - so I'll try to do so tomorrow.

The first block should also be easier for the mentors to review -
taverna-language is just an update (but adding wfdesc and tavlang) -
while taverna-osgi is pretty much dependency free and very IP-clean as
the code was brand new for Taverna 3.


Basically the first block is support libraries for the second block -
but could also be used independently.



The second block might still need some IP review - I think the rat
check is not happy with everything in taverna-engine yet. There might
still be a tiny bit of work needed on the README files here to explain
how it's all connected together.


Functionality-wise the second block is also ready to be released, it's
all compiling and passing tests. We have not yet done any integration
testing here, it would be good to know which workflows we know can run
(or not) before we announce the commandline - which basically includes


So the second block would take a month or two more before it's ready.


It could be that to accelerate the 3.1.0 release we do not yet want to
include the command line binary *distribution*  (the one with the
massive lib/ folder)  -- as that could complicate the work on required
LICENSE and NOTICE file. Early adapters should probably be OK to
compile for themselves (which would basically pull from Maven Central)
- they would then get a copy of that distribution folder on their own
machine.



Views..?

-- 
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating)
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718

Mime
View raw message