On Jun 20, 2013, at 10:58 AM, Christian Schneider <[email protected]> wrote: > On 20.06.2013 15:35, A. Rothman wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I finished fixing all the major bugs I've come across in the past couple of >> months. Code review and some more testing by others would be greatly >> appreciated - I'm sure there's room for improvement, but that's hard to do >> without feedback. >> >> A few things remain on my todo list, none of them blockers (mostly cleanup): >> >> 1. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DOSGI-108 - awaiting verdict >> (cschneider/dkulp?) > I commented in the issue. As a summary I would prefer keeping the comma > separated config for now. >> >> 2. Upgrading dependencies (and specifically >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DOSGI-191) - what is the policy on >> this? When do all the dependencies get upgraded? >> > Basically the dependency upgrades should match the kind of version we > release. For a bugfix release there should only be bugfix upgrades for a > minor release bugfix or minor upgrades... So I propose we upgrade to 3.3.2. > We can also upgrade to 3.4.0 but as the release is planned quite soon I > prefer the smaller upgrade. If you want to upgrade dependencies create an > issue for it and if it may have big impact it makes sense to discuss on the > list. > > I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DOSGI-192 to track this.
I thought we are discussing a 1.5.0 release which would be a minor release, not a patch/bugfix release. In that case, a zookeeper version upgrade would be fine. Dan >> 3. Refactoring to create utils module (still awaiting response to the mail >> from a few days ago) > I would prefer to wait with this till the next release. >> >> 4. Split zookeeper discovery into listening/publishing subpackages > Looks like a smaller change so I agree we can do this for 1.5.0. Can you > create an issue and do the change if you have time? >> >> 5. Standardizing variable names to make the code more consistent and readable > This sounds like a bigger change. At least it may affect a lot of code. Can > you propose a new naming scheme on the list? >> >> I can probably do them all in time, but would like to hear feedback if >> anyone is for/against them or has better ideas before I proceed. >> >> Finally, among the 34 unresolved issues, there seem to be a bunch related to >> distribution/deployment, possibly several are no longer relevant (e.g. >> single-bundle stuff). If anyone can sift through them and close the low >> hanging fruit (at least) that would be nice. > I regularly go through the issues and ask for feedback. I then close them if > there is no feedback after some time. Of course anyone feel free to do the > same. > > Christian > > -- > Christian Schneider > http://www.liquid-reality.de > > Open Source Architect > http://www.talend.com > -- Daniel Kulp [email protected] - http://dankulp.com/blog Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
