Hi Ryan,
Thank you so much for your work!
And I have some questions.
1. Will the uploading cycle of grizzly-memcached and grizzly-thrift's
snapshot be maintained as it was before? (Will they need a manual push by
someone or will they be published nightly automatically?)
2. If I think it can be released as not 1.0-SNAPSHOT but 1.0, should I
just inform you about that? Then will you release them and push(upload)
release-binaries to repositories(
http://repo1.maven.org or
https://maven.java.net/content/repositories/snapshots)?
3. I think it will be great if any guides or links are published at the
grizzly web pages for someone's contacting sources which are related to
grizzly project because they have different repositories from grizzly.
Currently, only grizzly sources are guided as the following link.
http://java.net/projects/grizzly/sources/git/show
http://grizzly.java.net/nonav/docs/docbkx2.2/html/sourcecode.html
Here is the reference link.
http://www.jboss.org/netty/related-projects
It is publishing related projects such as Protobuf, Tools(thrift), play
framework and etc...
I would like to know your thoughts. :)
Thanks!
Regards,
Bongjae Chang
On 3/6/12 8:42 AM, "Ryan Lubke" <ryan.lubke_at_oracle.com> wrote:
>I've moved thrift and memcached to their own repositories (keeps
>branching/tagging clear vs sharing):
>
> - grizzly~thrift
> - grizzly~memcached
>
>Versions are set to 1.0-SNAPSHOT. They are all yours, Bongjae :)
>
>On 2/20/12 6:20 PM, Bongjae Chang wrote:
>> Hi Ryan and Alexey,
>>
>> I agreed with your opinions. And I would like to follow your decisions.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> PS) Maybe it seems that GrizzlyMemcached is just completed. Zookeeper
>> integration was the last work which I had planned. :-)
>>
>> Regards,
>> Bongjae Chang
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2/21/12 8:33 AM, "Ryan Lubke"<ryan.lubke_at_oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2/20/12 2:55 PM, Oleksiy Stashok wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>>> Bongjae's commits this weekend gave me pause about the proper place
>>>>> for these projects.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Core Grizzly's branching cycles will differ from how these
>>>>> projects would typically evolve.
>>>>> For example, Bonjae's recent commits (no fault of his own) were
>>>>> made in the current master
>>>>> which is for 2.3, but these same commits are relevant for 2.2.
>>>>> 2) In most cases (please let me know if you disagree), there won't
>>>>> need to be core framework
>>>>> changes for these particular projects to evolve.
>>>>> 3) Core release cycle is going to differ. If memcached isn't ready,
>>>>> we don't want to hold up
>>>>> the core release for it, nor do we want to perform a release
>>>>> that pushes final versions of
>>>>> these artifacts to maven when they aren't ready for prime time.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to propose creating two new repositories (one for thrift and
>>>>> the other for memcached)
>>>>> and move the existing code there. Bonjgae can release 1.0 versions
>>>>> (or whatever version he feels
>>>>> is correct) when he feels they are properly baked depending on
>>>>> whatever final version of Grizzly
>>>>> is available within Maven.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts? Comments?
>>>> May be we can create just one repository for grizzly contributions
>>>> like memcached, thrift, potentially protobufs etc?
>>> As long as each 'project' is maintained separate, it should be fine.
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> WBR,
>>>> Alexey.
>>>>
>>
>