| Re: [unide-dev] WG: Unide releases |
Great! So to clarify short term actions, Axel or Henryk have the action item to get the Python binding people voted in as committers ;-) Benjamin - > Le 29 nov. 2017 à 14:12, Bor Gonzalez Usach <Bor.Gonzalez.Usach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit : > > Hi Benjamin, all, > > My apologies, I lost track of all the details. Now everything is clear to me. I'd say a call is not necessary. > > And I think your idea about synchronizing version numbers once in a while is good. > > Regards, > Bor > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 13:01:35 +0100 > From: Benjamin Cab? <benjamin.cabe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: unide developer discussions <unide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [unide-dev] WG: Unide releases > Message-ID: > <85390EC7-C8AD-4FCA-ADA2-2361A39659FA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Hi Bor, all, > > Maybe a call would be useful? I feel like we?ve had this conversation already at ECE but maybe it?s worth summarising :-) a few things below: > > On the topic of the 0.1.0 release: the Python binding is *not* part of this release, as the contribution hasn?t been fully reviewed by the IP team just yet. They only provided "check in" approval which means you can move the code to the Eclipse repository, but not have it as part of a final release just yet (it can be included in milestones though). > On the "unide" repo, I think Axel?s intention was to keep it for the REST server - the Java binding itself would move to the unide.java repo. Having the spec there also makes perfect sense IMO, and in any case it would be good to have a "source" for the spec that is *not* the website, i.e make it part of a more "developer-oriented" kind of repository, vs. the website repo. > "wait for access rights" for Python repo. Axel need to nominate you guys as committers on the project. Axel, let me know if something isn?t clear on how you should do this. > I agree that version number for the different bindings need not to be in-sync. Look at how Paho does, for example. What should happen though is that there will be an umbrella version for Unide releases, e.g Unide 0.2.0 will contain the 0.2.0 java binding and may very well contain a 0.1.0 version of the python binding. Maybe once in a while, and for major versions, the number can be aligned? E.g unide 1.0 to be released with a java and python (and others?)bindings bumped to a stable 0.1.0 > > HTH, > Benjamin - > >> Le 29 nov. 2017 ? 12:03, Bor Gonzalez Usach <Bor.Gonzalez.Usach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> a ?crit : >> >> Hello, >> >> this may be a repeated email for some of you, but I had some trouble with the mailing list. I hope it works. >> >> Please read below. >> >> Cheers, >> Bor >> >> >> Von: Bor Gonzalez Usach >> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. November 2017 11:54 >> An: 'Meinhardt Axel (INST-INL/PRM1)' <Axel.Meinhardt@xxxxxxxxxxxx >> <mailto:Axel.Meinhardt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>; Frank Patz-Brockmann >> <frank.patz-brockmann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> <mailto:frank.patz-brockmann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> >> Cc: unide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:unide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Alois Zoitl >> <zoitl@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:zoitl@xxxxxxxxxxx>>; Benjamin Cab? >> <benjamin.cabe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> <mailto:benjamin.cabe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> >> Betreff: AW: Unide releases >> >> Hello colleagues, >> >> I am a little confused with the release and the new structure of repositories. Now we have three repos: >> >> ? unide.java >> ? unide.python >> ? unide >> >> The first two ones are obviously for the java and python development, but the third one (the original one) is not very clear to me what should be used for. Moreover, it has been released as 0.1.0 containing only Java code. >> >> In my opinion, the old ?unide? repository should be one of those: >> ? A dummy repository with links to unide.python and .java. If used like this, there is no need for versioning or releases. >> ? A repository containing ppmp specification (and maybe the unide web). In this case, it makes sense to version/release it. >> >> Once this is said, this would be our immediate plan for unide.python: >> ? Wait for access rights to unide.python repository >> ? Move the old repository to its new place and delete the old one. >> ? Do some minor corrections on unide.python (links, etc) >> ? Tag it as 0.1.0 >> ? Release it in PyPI and github >> ? Remove the 0.9.0 version from PyPI >> >> Moreover, I?d like to say that ideally, unide.java and unide.python (and the many more to come like unide.c or .go) would run in parallel with same version numbers and offering the same capabilities? but this is the real world, they are at the end different projects and I?m pretty sure they are going to diverge and have different capabilities and version numbers. So there is no big reason to be very strict with the versioning of those subprojects? >> >> Would this be OK? Are we all on the same page? >> >> Cheers, >> Bor >> >> >> Von: Meinhardt Axel (INST-INL/PRM1) >> [mailto:Axel.Meinhardt@xxxxxxxxxxxx >> <mailto:Axel.Meinhardt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>] >> Gesendet: Dienstag, 28. November 2017 14:26 >> An: Frank Patz-Brockmann <frank.patz-brockmann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> <mailto:frank.patz-brockmann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> >> Cc: unide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:unide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Alois Zoitl >> <zoitl@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:zoitl@xxxxxxxxxxx>>; Benjamin Cab? >> <benjamin.cabe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> <mailto:benjamin.cabe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>; Bor Gonzalez Usach >> <Bor.Gonzalez.Usach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> <mailto:Bor.Gonzalez.Usach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> >> Betreff: RE: Unide releases >> >> The repositories are now available! <> >> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=525920 >> <https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=525920> >> https://github.com/eclipse/unide.python >> <https://github.com/eclipse/unide.python> >> https://github.com/eclipse/unide.java >> <https://github.com/eclipse/unide.java> >> >> >> >> >> Mit freundlichen Gr??en / Best regards >> >> Axel Meinhardt >> >> (INST-INL/PRM1) >> Bosch Software Innovations GmbH | Ullsteinstr. 128 | 12109 Berlin | >> GERMANY | www.bosch-si.com <http://www.bosch-si.com/> Tel. +49 30 >> 726112486 | Mobil +49 173 5173094 | Fax +49 30 726112-100 | >> axel.meinhardt@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:axel.meinhardt@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Sitz: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg; HRB 148411 >> B >> Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Dr.-Ing. Thorsten L?cke; Gesch?ftsf?hrung: >> Dr.-Ing. Rainer Kallenbach, Michael Hahn >> >> >> From: Frank Patz-Brockmann >> [mailto:frank.patz-brockmann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> <mailto:frank.patz-brockmann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>] >> Sent: Dienstag, 28. November 2017 13:30 >> To: Meinhardt Axel (INST-INL/PRM1) <Axel.Meinhardt@xxxxxxxxxxxx >> <mailto:Axel.Meinhardt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>> >> Cc: unide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:unide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Alois Zoitl >> <zoitl@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:zoitl@xxxxxxxxxxx>>; Benjamin Cab? >> <benjamin.cabe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> <mailto:benjamin.cabe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>; Bor Gonzalez Usach >> <Bor.Gonzalez.Usach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> <mailto:Bor.Gonzalez.Usach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> >> Subject: Re: Unide releases >> >> Hi all, >> >> sounds good! To begin with, we should approach the repo problem really soon now. >> >> @Bor: we should pull the unide-python from PyPI then and replace it with one with the right release number. @Others: we have to have a unide-python distro on PyPI for automated deployments/builds to work. Any suggestions what we should use as a version while the overal Unide relase is at 0.1.0? >> >> Regards, >> - frank >> >> P.S: did I somehow miss that there is a unide-dev list now? >> >> >> Am 28.11.2017 um 13:19 schrieb Meinhardt Axel (INST-INL/PRM1) <Axel.Meinhardt@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Axel.Meinhardt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>: >> >> Hi there, >> >> Unide Release 0.1.0 has approved, >> ? https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14591 <https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14591> >> ? https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/iot.unide/releases/0.1.0 <https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/iot.unide/releases/0.1.0> >> ? https://github.com/eclipse/unide/releases/tag/0.1.0 <https://github.com/eclipse/unide/releases/tag/0.1.0> >> >> So I?ve scheduled the next release for 31.01.2018: >> ? https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/iot.unide/releases/0.2.0/plan <https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/iot.unide/releases/0.2.0/plan> >> ? https://github.com/eclipse/unide/milestone/1 <https://github.com/eclipse/unide/milestone/1> >> ? including >> ? Python binding: https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14478 <https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14478> >> ? Bindings separated in own repositories: https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=525920 <https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=525920> >> o Benjamin: you wanted to review this, any updates here? >> ? Maybe a C binding by 4diac/Alois as suggested in https://github.com/eclipse/unide/issues/2 <https://github.com/eclipse/unide/issues/2> ? >> ? JSON schema fixes, especially https://github.com/eclipse/unide/issues/21 <https://github.com/eclipse/unide/issues/21> >> ? Fix rest of the github issues: https://github.com/eclipse/unide/milestone/1 <https://github.com/eclipse/unide/milestone/1> >> >> What?s your opinion/feedback on this plan? >> >> Mit freundlichen Gr??en / Best regards >> >> Axel Meinhardt >> >> (INST-INL/PRM1) >> Bosch Software Innovations GmbH | Ullsteinstr. 128 | 12109 Berlin | >> GERMANY | www.bosch-si.com <http://www.bosch-si.com/> Tel. +49 30 >> 726112486 | Mobil +49 173 5173094 | Fax +49 30 726112-100 | >> axel.meinhardt@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:axel.meinhardt@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Sitz: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg; HRB 148411 >> B >> Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Dr.-Ing. Thorsten L?cke; Gesch?ftsf?hrung: >> Dr.-Ing. Rainer Kallenbach, Michael Hahn >> >> _______________________________________________ >> unide-dev mailing list >> unide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:unide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> To change your >> delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this >> list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/unide-dev >> <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/unide-dev> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/unide-dev/attachments/20171129/e4c3bcf4/attachment.html> > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 488 bytes > Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP > URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/unide-dev/attachments/20171129/e4c3bcf4/attachment.sig> > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > unide-dev mailing list > unide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx > To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/unide-dev > > > End of unide-dev Digest, Vol 3, Issue 4 > *************************************** > _______________________________________________ > unide-dev mailing list > unide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx > To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/unide-dev
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP