[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [rt-pmc] Gemini subproject situation
|
well, my vote would be to make a 1.0.0.M2 and run that through the
conditioning process, its _clearly_ a milestone at that point naming
wise, and is 'official' in that it is conditioned. Its disingenuous
to present it as anything other then that in my book as its is end of
life and not maintained.
personal feeling on that, do whatever tom is cool with :)
jesse
--
jesse mcconnell
jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 08:40, Glyn Normington <gnormington@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I guess the difference is that users might dream of getting support on a release but they'd never get support on a milestone. I think some shops have policies that outlaw the use of milestones in production. I guess a formal release puts the users in a slightly stronger position should they wish to contribute and do their own support.
>
> Oh and a formal release shows all the legal approvals have been finalised, which may be important to these users.
>
> Regards,
> Glyn
>
> On 18 Jan 2012, at 14:18, Jesse McConnell wrote:
>
>> o.O
>>
>> what exactly does anyone gain from having something named
>> 0.9.0.v201201180815 over 1.0.0.M1
>>
>> is there some super sekrit special powers granted on osgi land? its a
>> jar file...I don't see the distinction of M1 vs v201201180815 for
>> anything other then political reasons, if the M1 just needs signed
>> then make an M2 and sign it...we run our M and RC releases through the
>> signing process for our p2 repos
>>
>> anyway, probably safe to ignore my thoughts and go with what tom says
>> then, he is the master in these things :)
>>
>> cheers,
>> jesse
>>
>> --
>> jesse mcconnell
>> jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 08:04, michael keith <michael.keith@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> That very important differentiation is exactly the issue :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> On 18/01/2012 3:49 AM, Glyn Normington wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Seems reasonable to me.
>>>>
>>>> But let's avoid using the R-word when talking about milestones. ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Glyn
>>>>
>>>> On 17 Jan 2012, at 23:10, Jesse McConnell wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> as there must have been development after the M1 release, what about
>>>>> making a 1.0.0.M2 released version and then just indicate that it is
>>>>> eol and not being maintained any longer
>>>>>
>>>>> seems the easiest thing to do osgi wise
>>>>>
>>>>> jesse
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> jesse mcconnell
>>>>> jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 16:36, Thomas Watson<tjwatson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not in favor of releasing anything from incubation unless it is
>>>>>> mature
>>>>>> and has plans to be maintained and evolve in the future. My vote would
>>>>>> be
>>>>>> 2). My rational is that you have not really ever made a real release of
>>>>>> this stuff so it is fine to degrade the version to 0.9.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unless I am mistaken it sounds like very few, if any, would be effected
>>>>>> by
>>>>>> degrading the version of this bundle when you make the first release as
>>>>>> an
>>>>>> incubation project. Am I missing something? Do others in the community
>>>>>> view the 1.0.0 M1 contents as a released version of the Gemini Naming
>>>>>> project?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tom
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> |------------>
>>>>>> | From: |
>>>>>> |------------>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>>>>>> |michael keith<michael.keith@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> |
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>>>>>> |------------>
>>>>>> | To: |
>>>>>> |------------>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>>>>>> |Runtime Project PMC mailing list<rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
>>>>>> |
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>>>>>> |------------>
>>>>>> | Date: |
>>>>>> |------------>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>>>>>> |01/17/2012 04:10 PM
>>>>>>
>>>>>> |
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>>>>>> |------------>
>>>>>> | Subject: |
>>>>>> |------------>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>>>>>> |[rt-pmc] Gemini subproject situation
>>>>>> |
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We have a question in the Gemini project that we would like to ask the
>>>>>> PMC to weigh in on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Gemini Naming project was a Gemini subproject that was never
>>>>>> intended to be maintained much, but that some people find useful. It is
>>>>>> the implementation of the OSGi JNDI spec that might not ever be updated
>>>>>> because there will likely not be a need. Bob Nettleton from Oracle wrote
>>>>>> and led the project until about a year ago when he was no longer able to
>>>>>> be involved. He made a 1.0.0 M1 milestone available. The project never
>>>>>> left incubation when most of the other Gemini subprojects did.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We have had some people ask for a release and one suggestion was that we
>>>>>> put out a 0.9 release and leave the project in incubation. However,
>>>>>> since a 1.0.0 M1 milestone was already made available it would seem like
>>>>>> the wrong choice to put out a lower 0.9 release at this stage. I always
>>>>>> figured that projects should not release a 1.0 while in incubation, but
>>>>>> the alternative is to graduate the project, release a 1.0, and
>>>>>> effectively not do any development on it. It should be released, but
>>>>>> which of these options, or some alternative option, do people think
>>>>>> would be the best course of action?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Bring the project to graduation (even though there may not be much
>>>>>> development on it after that point) and release a 1.0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) Leave the project in incubation and put out a 0.9 release, even
>>>>>> though a 1.0 M1 is already available
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3) Leave the project in incubation and put out a 1.0 release
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Whatever choice is the right one would be fine, we just don't know what
>>>>>> that is.
>>>>>> My vote would probably be for (1), but as the Gemini project lead I am
>>>>>> somewhat interest-conflicted :-).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> -Mike
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> rt-pmc mailing list
>>>>>> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> rt-pmc mailing list
>>>>>> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> rt-pmc mailing list
>>>>> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> rt-pmc mailing list
>>>> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rt-pmc mailing list
>>> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
>> _______________________________________________
>> rt-pmc mailing list
>> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
>
> _______________________________________________
> rt-pmc mailing list
> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
