Hi all,

I think we can say we're finished with Phase I of the the big bang plan
[0].

Emmanuel planted the seed in my head that we might consider replacing the
current trunk with a copy of the big bang branch before moving forward on
Phase II.  He made some excellent points:

o this gives developers a chance to see the changes
o allows for an interim release if the team wants to release 1.5.2
o gives the team a chance to start documenting some changes
o prevents stalling somewhat as this refactoring is underway

These are all good points.  Personally I'm strapped on time trying to work
on
various things such as Triplesec, the refactoring in bigbang, and my day
job.
So I may not have enough time for helping out in a release but I'm fully
supportive
of one.

Copying big bang over to trunk check points the refactoring at a community
level:
heck svn automatically checkpoints for us and we can tag things as they are
now
too.  But the point is it checkpoints the current state and sends a clear
message
about where we are and what we can do before we do much with more in the
bigbang.
Who knows Phase II might become a big mess and/or we might not like where we

get to.  We may decide to keep things as they are after Phase I.

Should we replace trunk now with the bigbang?

[  ] +1 - replace trunk with big bang in present state
[  ] +/-0 - don't care
[  ] -1 - no not now

Thanks,
Alex

---------------------

[0] -
[url]http://www.nabble.com/-ApacheDS---BigBang--Status-Report-tf4585474.html#a13089517[
/url]

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Hm, I don't have enough knowledge what you guys have done in the big
bang branch. So I just vote with 0. I trust you guys that you know what
is best.

> Should we replace trunk now with the bigbang?
>
> [X] +/-0 - don't care

Regards,
Stefan Seelmann

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Alex Karasulu wrote:
>
> Emmanuel planted the seed in my head that we might consider replacing the
> current trunk with a copy of the big bang branch before moving forward on
> Phase II.  He made some excellent points:
>
>   o this gives developers a chance to see the changes
>   o allows for an interim release if the team wants to release 1.5.2
>   o gives the team a chance to start documenting some changes
>   o prevents stalling somewhat as this refactoring is underway
>
> [  ] +1 - replace trunk with big bang in present state
> [  ] +/-0 - don't care
> [  ] -1 - no not now
>

+1

I vote +1 in the hope that the configuration in the server.xml etc. ill
not change dramatically before 2.0 release. It is hard to document a
moving target. And we have to start documentation for 2.0 if we want to
have quality at release.

Greetings from Hamburg,
Stefan Z


---8<---

Stefan Zoerner (szoerner-1oDqGaOF3Lkdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org)
Committer :: PMC Member

Apache Directory Project
http://directory.apache.org

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Well I'm biased but +1 :-)

There are a couple tiny tweaks I'd like but they are pretty small I
think.

thanks
david jencks

On Oct 29, 2007, at 11:22 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I think we can say we're finished with Phase I of the the big bang
> plan [0].
>
> Emmanuel planted the seed in my head that we might consider
> replacing the
> current trunk with a copy of the big bang branch before moving
> forward on
> Phase II.  He made some excellent points:
>
>   o this gives developers a chance to see the changes
>   o allows for an interim release if the team wants to release 1.5.2
>   o gives the team a chance to start documenting some changes
>   o prevents stalling somewhat as this refactoring is underway
>
> These are all good points.  Personally I'm strapped on time trying
> to work on
> various things such as Triplesec, the refactoring in bigbang, and
> my day job.
> So I may not have enough time for helping out in a release but I'm
> fully supportive
> of one.
>
> Copying big bang over to trunk check points the refactoring at a
> community level:
> heck svn automatically checkpoints for us and we can tag things as
> they are now
> too.  But the point is it checkpoints the current state and sends a
> clear message
> about where we are and what we can do before we do much with more
> in the bigbang.
> Who knows Phase II might become a big mess and/or we might not like
> where we
> get to.  We may decide to keep things as they are after Phase I.
>
> Should we replace trunk now with the bigbang?
>
> [  ] +1 - replace trunk with big bang in present state
> [  ] +/-0 - don't care
> [  ] -1 - no not now
>
> Thanks,
> Alex
>
> ---------------------
>
> [0] - http://www.nabble.com/-ApacheDS---B...-Status-Report-
> tf4585474.html#a13089517

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

On 10/29/07, David Jencks <david_jencks-/E1597aS9LQAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:[vbco
l=seagreen]
>
> Well I'm biased but +1 :-)
> There are a couple tiny tweaks I'd like but they are pretty small I think.
>[/vbcol]

Likewise I have a few tweaks but I guess we can do some of it before the
copy over.
There may be additional things that are introduced but they would be add on
configuration
items rather than change what exists.  Meaning for additional components
which might
not be present unless used.

Alex

thanks
> david jencks
>
> On Oct 29, 2007, at 11:22 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I think we can say we're finished with Phase I of the the big bang plan
> [0].
>
> Emmanuel planted the seed in my head that we might consider replacing the
> current trunk with a copy of the big bang branch before moving forward on
> Phase II.  He made some excellent points:
>
>   o this gives developers a chance to see the changes
>   o allows for an interim release if the team wants to release 1.5.2
>   o gives the team a chance to start documenting some changes
>   o prevents stalling somewhat as this refactoring is underway
>
> These are all good points.  Personally I'm strapped on time trying to work
> on
> various things such as Triplesec, the refactoring in bigbang, and my day
> job.
> So I may not have enough time for helping out in a release but I'm fully
> supportive
> of one.
>
> Copying big bang over to trunk check points the refactoring at a community
> level:
> heck svn automatically checkpoints for us and we can tag things as they
> are now
> too.  But the point is it checkpoints the current state and sends a clear
> message
> about where we are and what we can do before we do much with more in the
> bigbang.
> Who knows Phase II might become a big mess and/or we might not like where
> we
> get to.  We may decide to keep things as they are after Phase I.
>
> Should we replace trunk now with the bigbang?
>
> [  ] +1 - replace trunk with big bang in present state
> [  ] +/-0 - don't care
> [  ] -1 - no not now
>
> Thanks,
> Alex
>
> ---------------------
>
> [0] - http://www.nabble.com/-ApacheDS---B.../>
l#a13089517
>
>
>
>

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

> 
>

It does not matter to me when this is done.  There are trade offs either
way.

<OT>
We cannot guarantee that the configuration will not change until we freeze
all features
and start releasing a 2.0-RC1.  However I can say with great confidence that
what ever
changes do occur, they will not be major since most of the heavy changes
have already
been committed.  As David mentioned already they would be minor tweaks.

If the documentation crew documents the new configuration file format then
it's up
to those who do make minor changes to update their documents.  I will
consider it
a personal responsibility of mine to update the documentation if I induce
any minor
changes. This should be the case for everyone.
</OT>

Alex

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

> [X] +1 - replace trunk with big bang in present state

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Hi Alex!

Is this vote still open?
If yes, we (you?) should close it.

Thanks in advance,
Stefan Z.

Alex Karasulu wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I think we can say we're finished with Phase I of the the big bang plan
> [0].
>
> Emmanuel planted the seed in my head that we might consider replacing the
> current trunk with a copy of the big bang branch before moving forward on
> Phase II.  He made some excellent points:
>
>   o this gives developers a chance to see the changes
>   o allows for an interim release if the team wants to release 1.5.2
>   o gives the team a chance to start documenting some changes
>   o prevents stalling somewhat as this refactoring is underway
>
> These are all good points.  Personally I'm strapped on time trying to
> work on
> various things such as Triplesec, the refactoring in bigbang, and my day
> job.
> So I may not have enough time for helping out in a release but I'm fully
> supportive
> of one.
>
> Copying big bang over to trunk check points the refactoring at a
> community level:
> heck svn automatically checkpoints for us and we can tag things as they
> are now
> too.  But the point is it checkpoints the current state and sends a
> clear message
> about where we are and what we can do before we do much with more in the
> bigbang.
> Who knows Phase II might become a big mess and/or we might not like
> where we
> get to.  We may decide to keep things as they are after Phase I.
>
> Should we replace trunk now with the bigbang?
>
> [  ] +1 - replace trunk with big bang in present state
> [  ] +/-0 - don't care
> [  ] -1 - no not now
>
> Thanks,
> Alex
>
> ---------------------
>
> [0] -
> http://www.nabble.com/-ApacheDS---B...308951
7
> <http://www.nabble.com/-ApacheDS---B....html#a13089517
>

---8<---

Stefan Zoerner (szoerner-1oDqGaOF3Lkdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org)
Committer :: PMC Member

Apache Directory Project
http://directory.apache.org

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

ahh yeah thanks...

This vote is closed and seems to pass since we have 3 +1 votes and 2
+0 votes.  Let's do it.

Alex


On Nov 12, 2007 2:54 PM, Stefan Zoerner <szoerner-1oDqGaOF3Lkdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> w
rote:
> Hi Alex!
>
> Is this vote still open?
> If yes, we (you?) should close it.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>      Stefan Z.
>
>
> Alex Karasulu wrote: 
>
>
> ---8<---
>
> Stefan Zoerner (szoerner-1oDqGaOF3Lkdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org)
> Committer :: PMC Member
>
> Apache Directory Project
> http://directory.apache.org
>
>

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Alex Karasulu wrote:
> ahh yeah thanks...
>
> This vote is closed and seems to pass since we have 3 +1 votes and 2
> +0 votes.  Let's do it.
>
> Alex
>
Could we start soon ? Otherwise we will have a bigbang for ever ;)

--
--
cordialement, regards,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
directory.apache.org

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]