I don't see the practicality of a 1.2 without 3T. Too many people are using
it in its limited form with the expectation that it will soon be available
in a production quality release (i.e. by the time we're done with our code,
they'll be done with theirs). Changing that could really annoy the
community, and we need a happy community now :)
Re SVN, I was recently turned onto a new Subclipse replacement called
Subversive: http://www.polarion.org/p_subversive.php. I think SVN dwarfs CVS
on every level, but I've always been -1 (or -.01 anyway) because of the
poorness of the Subclipse plugin. I frequently have to re-check-out my
subclipse-managed projects because it utterly hoses the SVN files on large
refactorings. Try moving a package with subpackages and watch your life end
quickly.
Subversive seems better so far. It may make this a less painful process.
Also, I've successfully migrated CVS to SVN a few times now on huge
repositories. I think Apache will do some of this heavy lifting for us, but
I can assist if necessary. As a general rule, though, the migration is an
automated process that needs manually tuned. I typically do it 20-30 times
on a Cayenne-sized project before getting all the tags migrated the way I
want, etc. Less picky people may have less attempts!
Also, I entirely agree on leaving docs in the wiki. I don't even believe I'm
biased by the time invested so far! Frameworks live and die by their
documentation. Without dissing Apache or the project doc people, I don't
think its a stretch to say that any list of the top 10 best documented
frameworks doesn't include an Apache project :) I'd be inclined to say that
it is because the patch process discourages participation from all but the
most dedicated community members.
Cris
On 3/9/06, Bill Dudney <bdudne..pache.org> wrote:
>
> The incubator lists can some times generate quite a bit of heat
> without a lot of light :-)
>
> On the 1.2 vs 2.0 release we can address that we a branch I think.
> Get the code checked in and make a branch right away. Then continue
> on the 1.2 release path while refactoring the 2.0 code to be apache
> package names. I don't know about repackaging and stuff but it seems
> to me that it should be straightforward to continue down the 1.2 path
> until we are ready for a release. Could be part of the 'out of
> incubation' plan.
>
> OTH is it possible to do a 1.2 release sooner rather than later?
> Could we get rid of some of the planned features and get done much
> sooner? I'm not familiar enough with what is planned to know if that
> is possible or not.
>
> TTFN,
>
> Bill Dudney
> MyFaces - myfaces.apache.org
>
> On Mar 9, 2006, at 8:22 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>
> >
> > On Mar 9, 2006, at 4:43 PM, Bill Dudney wrote:
> >
> >> Well as I understand it only special circumstances are required
> >> for an Incubator PMC vote, at least that is what I read here;
> >>
> >> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/
> >> Incubation_Policy.html#Acceptance+of+Proposal+by+Sponsor
> >>
> >> Once the DB PMC posted that they accepted us the Incubator
> >> acceptance is automatic.
> >>
> >> So now all we really need is for someone to be actively pushing
> >> things forward. I'm happy to do that.
> >
> >
> > Excellent! As usual I was confused and those replying on the
> > incubator list would only make things worse. I haven't seen any two
> > people who would fully agree on the procedure, and got stuck
> > looking for Champion, doh! :-) If no more voting is needed inside
> > the Incubator, the next thing we need is Subversion space for the
> > project and accounts for everyone listed as committers.
> >
> >> BTW Apache does not support CVS anymore, all projects are now on SVN.
> >
> > Ok, SVN it is then.
> >
> >
> >> My take is, move to SVN with existing package names and history.
> >> Then use SVN & Eclipse to do the refactoring. This will keep your
> >> history in tact (but it confuses Eclipse so its not easy to see
> >> the history in Eclipse). So you get the best of both, history and
> >> new package names. There are several different ways to do this and
> >> I'd be happy to help out with this we'd just have to have a freeze
> >> while we repackage everything then have everyone help out with
> >> getting the build to work again.
> >
> > Makes sense. Once we get accounts setup, lets get back to it and
> > designate a freeze date.
> >
> > Another consideration is that we need to keep 1.2 release in the
> > "org.objectstyle.cayenne" namespace and move to org.apache.cayenne
> > in 2.0. Do you think we'll be able to make releases while in the
> > Incubator as "org.objectstyle.cayenne"? Otherwise it maybe too
> > early to branch now. Still, we can move the JPA stuff to Apache
> > immediately.
> >
> > Andrus
> >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu Mar 09 2006 - 21:13:12 EST