Ignite-1.5 Release

[Raul Kripalani]

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> At the risk of sounding pedantic, I think this link is best included as
> part of some other OSGI documentation page (no?):
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v1.5/docs/introduction
>

The page slug/permalink was incorrect. I updated it and it's now
https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v1.5/docs/osgi-supported-modules
.

I wanted to include this as an explicit section so that it catches the
user's attention in order to set their expectations accurately about what's
supported and what isn't. I prefer to avoid surprises in case they didn't
see that section if it's "buried" elsewhere.

*Raúl Kripalani*
PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and
Messaging Engineer
http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk

[dsetrakyan]

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:16 PM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > At the risk of sounding pedantic, I think this link is best included as
> > part of some other OSGI documentation page (no?):
> > https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v1.5/docs/introduction
> >
>
> The page slug/permalink was incorrect. I updated it and it's now
>
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v1.5/docs/osgi-supported-modules
> .
>
> I wanted to include this as an explicit section so that it catches the
> user's attention in order to set their expectations accurately about what's
> supported and what isn't. I prefer to avoid surprises in case they didn't
> see that section if it's "buried" elsewhere.
>

Agree. Btw, is ignite-spring module supported? I thought you mentioned that
it is not in another email.

[Raul Kripalani]

It's integrated, i.e. it deploys on an OSGi container. And the Ignite part
works. But at soon as it delegates to Spring to parse the context XML, the
latter complains about namespace handlers not being found.

Spring DM looks into bundles to find NS handlers. So without Spring DM such
problems are expected.

Maybe it does work after all if we refrain from using certain namespace
like util. I'll have to check that tomorrow.

Raúl.

[dsetrakyan]

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 3:09 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]> wrote:

> It's integrated, i.e. it deploys on an OSGi container. And the Ignite part
> works. But at soon as it delegates to Spring to parse the context XML, the
> latter complains about namespace handlers not being found.
>
> Spring DM looks into bundles to find NS handlers. So without Spring DM such
> problems are expected.
>
> Maybe it does work after all if we refrain from using certain namespace
> like util. I'll have to check that tomorrow.
>

Thanks! Dropping support for Spring XML configuration in OSGI would be a
huge loss. Would be great if you could investigate it and see what it would
take.

[yzhdanov]

Guys,

Small update. We are very close to submit Ignite-1.5-RC1. We currently
fixing TeamCity in ignite-1.5 branch.

--Yakov

2015-11-25 3:39 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>:

> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 3:09 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > It's integrated, i.e. it deploys on an OSGi container. And the Ignite
> part
> > works. But at soon as it delegates to Spring to parse the context XML,
> the
> > latter complains about namespace handlers not being found.
> >
> > Spring DM looks into bundles to find NS handlers. So without Spring DM
> such
> > problems are expected.
> >
> > Maybe it does work after all if we refrain from using certain namespace
> > like util. I'll have to check that tomorrow.
> >
>
> Thanks! Dropping support for Spring XML configuration in OSGI would be a
> huge loss. Would be great if you could investigate it and see what it would
> take.
>

[yzhdanov]

Guys,

Our plan was to release over the weekend, but unfortunately that didn’t
happen due to a few bugs. And even though we have fixed all the discovered
issues I am still not comfortable with releasing the final version. Having
the great number of functionality introduced in 1.5 including (but not
limited to) - .net and cpp platforms, marshalling changes to support
platforms and massive optimizations - I would ask community whether we can
release 1.5.0-EA and have folks to play with it for a week or so and then
release the final version.

Please let me know your opinion. If community agrees I will submit 1.5.0-EA
for vote in a few hours.

--Yakov

2015-11-28 13:57 GMT+03:00 Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]>:

> Guys,
>
> Small update. We are very close to submit Ignite-1.5-RC1. We currently
> fixing TeamCity in ignite-1.5 branch.
>
> --Yakov
>
> 2015-11-25 3:39 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>:
>
>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 3:09 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> > It's integrated, i.e. it deploys on an OSGi container. And the Ignite
>> part
>> > works. But at soon as it delegates to Spring to parse the context XML,
>> the
>> > latter complains about namespace handlers not being found.
>> >
>> > Spring DM looks into bundles to find NS handlers. So without Spring DM
>> such
>> > problems are expected.
>> >
>> > Maybe it does work after all if we refrain from using certain namespace
>> > like util. I'll have to check that tomorrow.
>> >
>>
>> Thanks! Dropping support for Spring XML configuration in OSGI would be a
>> huge loss. Would be great if you could investigate it and see what it
>> would
>> take.
>>
>
>

[Alexey Kuznetsov-2]

+1 for EA

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 11:30 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Guys,
>
> Our plan was to release over the weekend, but unfortunately that didn’t
> happen due to a few bugs. And even though we have fixed all the discovered
> issues I am still not comfortable with releasing the final version. Having
> the great number of functionality introduced in 1.5 including (but not
> limited to) - .net and cpp platforms, marshalling changes to support
> platforms and massive optimizations - I would ask community whether we can
> release 1.5.0-EA and have folks to play with it for a week or so and then
> release the final version.
>
> Please let me know your opinion. If community agrees I will submit 1.5.0-EA
> for vote in a few hours.
>
> --Yakov
>
> 2015-11-28 13:57 GMT+03:00 Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]>:
>
> > Guys,
> >
> > Small update. We are very close to submit Ignite-1.5-RC1. We currently
> > fixing TeamCity in ignite-1.5 branch.
> >
> > --Yakov
> >
> > 2015-11-25 3:39 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>:
> >
> >> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 3:09 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > It's integrated, i.e. it deploys on an OSGi container. And the Ignite
> >> part
> >> > works. But at soon as it delegates to Spring to parse the context XML,
> >> the
> >> > latter complains about namespace handlers not being found.
> >> >
> >> > Spring DM looks into bundles to find NS handlers. So without Spring DM
> >> such
> >> > problems are expected.
> >> >
> >> > Maybe it does work after all if we refrain from using certain
> namespace
> >> > like util. I'll have to check that tomorrow.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Thanks! Dropping support for Spring XML configuration in OSGI would be a
> >> huge loss. Would be great if you could investigate it and see what it
> >> would
> >> take.
> >>
> >
> >
>

--
Alexey Kuznetsov
GridGain Systems
www.gridgain.com

[Nikolay Tikhonov]

I'm fully agree with Yakov. We plain to release massive changes and I think
that it's good chance for community to play with new features and we can
get more feedback.

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 7:32 PM, Alexey Kuznetsov <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> +1 for EA
>
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 11:30 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Guys,
> >
> > Our plan was to release over the weekend, but unfortunately that didn’t
> > happen due to a few bugs. And even though we have fixed all the
> discovered
> > issues I am still not comfortable with releasing the final version.
> Having
> > the great number of functionality introduced in 1.5 including (but not
> > limited to) - .net and cpp platforms, marshalling changes to support
> > platforms and massive optimizations - I would ask community whether we
> can
> > release 1.5.0-EA and have folks to play with it for a week or so and then
> > release the final version.
> >
> > Please let me know your opinion. If community agrees I will submit
> 1.5.0-EA
> > for vote in a few hours.
> >
> > --Yakov
> >
> > 2015-11-28 13:57 GMT+03:00 Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > > Guys,
> > >
> > > Small update. We are very close to submit Ignite-1.5-RC1. We currently
> > > fixing TeamCity in ignite-1.5 branch.
> > >
> > > --Yakov
> > >
> > > 2015-11-25 3:39 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>:
> > >
> > >> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 3:09 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > It's integrated, i.e. it deploys on an OSGi container. And the
> Ignite
> > >> part
> > >> > works. But at soon as it delegates to Spring to parse the context
> XML,
> > >> the
> > >> > latter complains about namespace handlers not being found.
> > >> >
> > >> > Spring DM looks into bundles to find NS handlers. So without Spring
> DM
> > >> such
> > >> > problems are expected.
> > >> >
> > >> > Maybe it does work after all if we refrain from using certain
> > namespace
> > >> > like util. I'll have to check that tomorrow.
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> Thanks! Dropping support for Spring XML configuration in OSGI would
> be a
> > >> huge loss. Would be great if you could investigate it and see what it
> > >> would
> > >> take.
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Alexey Kuznetsov
> GridGain Systems
> www.gridgain.com
>

[Raul Kripalani]

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Please let me know your opinion. If community agrees I will submit 1.5.0-EA
> for vote in a few hours.
>

Would this be an EA or a RC?

Regards,

*Raúl Kripalani*
PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and
Messaging Engineer
http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk

[dsetrakyan]

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 8:57 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Please let me know your opinion. If community agrees I will submit
> 1.5.0-EA
> > for vote in a few hours.
> >
>

> Would this be an EA or a RC?
>

I think we should definitely release an early access, prior to a final
release. However, as Raul pointed out, it should be 1.5.0-RC1 version.


> Regards,
>
> *Raúl Kripalani*
> PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and
> Messaging Engineer
> http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
>

[yzhdanov]

Raul, every build submitted for vote is RC (so, on first iteration this
will be 1.5.0-EA-RC1). Once accepted RC gets stripped off and we get
official release. My idea is to have EA available via maven and from the
website.

--Yakov

2015-11-30 19:57 GMT+03:00 Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>:

> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Please let me know your opinion. If community agrees I will submit
> 1.5.0-EA
> > for vote in a few hours.
> >
>
> Would this be an EA or a RC?
>
> Regards,
>
> *Raúl Kripalani*
> PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and
> Messaging Engineer
> http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
>

[yzhdanov]

Guys, common practice when dealing with EA builds is to have EA (or EA1),
EA2, etc versions. So, I would prefer to follow this process.

--Yakov

2015-11-30 20:04 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>:

> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 8:57 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Please let me know your opinion. If community agrees I will submit
> > 1.5.0-EA
> > > for vote in a few hours.
> > >
> >
>
> > Would this be an EA or a RC?
> >
>
> I think we should definitely release an early access, prior to a final
> release. However, as Raul pointed out, it should be 1.5.0-RC1 version.
>
>
> > Regards,
> >
> > *Raúl Kripalani*
> > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and
> > Messaging Engineer
> > http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> >
>

[Alexey Goncharuk]

Agree, +1 for the EA. We are preparing to change the default marshaller, so
it will be great to obtain the feedback from the community and see if we
missed something.

[dsetrakyan]

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Guys, common practice when dealing with EA builds is to have EA (or EA1),
> EA2, etc versions. So, I would prefer to follow this process.
>

Yakov, what would be the final version of the downloadable EA release?

>
> --Yakov
>
> 2015-11-30 20:04 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 8:57 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Please let me know your opinion. If community agrees I will submit
> > > 1.5.0-EA
> > > > for vote in a few hours.
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > > Would this be an EA or a RC?
> > >
> >
> > I think we should definitely release an early access, prior to a final
> > release. However, as Raul pointed out, it should be 1.5.0-RC1 version.
> >
> >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > *Raúl Kripalani*
> > > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data
> and
> > > Messaging Engineer
> > > http://about.me/raulkripalani |
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> > > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> > >
> >
>

[yzhdanov]

Dmitry, it will be 1.5.0-EA.

--Yakov

2015-11-30 20:10 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>:

> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Guys, common practice when dealing with EA builds is to have EA (or EA1),
> > EA2, etc versions. So, I would prefer to follow this process.
> >
>
> Yakov, what would be the final version of the downloadable EA release?
>
>
> >
> > --Yakov
> >
> > 2015-11-30 20:04 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 8:57 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Please let me know your opinion. If community agrees I will submit
> > > > 1.5.0-EA
> > > > > for vote in a few hours.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > Would this be an EA or a RC?
> > > >
> > >
> > > I think we should definitely release an early access, prior to a final
> > > release. However, as Raul pointed out, it should be 1.5.0-RC1 version.
> > >
> > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > *Raúl Kripalani*
> > > > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data
> > and
> > > > Messaging Engineer
> > > > http://about.me/raulkripalani |
> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> > > > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[dsetrakyan]

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Dmitry, it will be 1.5.0-EA.
>

How about 1.5.0-EA1? We may have more than one EA release.

>
> --Yakov
>
> 2015-11-30 20:10 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Guys, common practice when dealing with EA builds is to have EA (or
> EA1),
> > > EA2, etc versions. So, I would prefer to follow this process.
> > >
> >
> > Yakov, what would be the final version of the downloadable EA release?
> >
> >
> > >
> > > --Yakov
> > >
> > > 2015-11-30 20:04 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 8:57 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <
> [hidden email]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Please let me know your opinion. If community agrees I will
> submit
> > > > > 1.5.0-EA
> > > > > > for vote in a few hours.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Would this be an EA or a RC?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I think we should definitely release an early access, prior to a
> final
> > > > release. However, as Raul pointed out, it should be 1.5.0-RC1
> version.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > *Raúl Kripalani*
> > > > > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big
> Data
> > > and
> > > > > Messaging Engineer
> > > > > http://about.me/raulkripalani |
> > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> > > > > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[Sergey Kozlov]

Next EA will be EA2 but I hope it will be RC1

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 8:13 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Dmitry, it will be 1.5.0-EA.
> >
>
> How about 1.5.0-EA1? We may have more than one EA release.
>
>
> >
> > --Yakov
> >
> > 2015-11-30 20:10 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Guys, common practice when dealing with EA builds is to have EA (or
> > EA1),
> > > > EA2, etc versions. So, I would prefer to follow this process.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yakov, what would be the final version of the downloadable EA release?
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > --Yakov
> > > >
> > > > 2015-11-30 20:04 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]
> >:
> > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 8:57 AM, Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please let me know your opinion. If community agrees I will
> > submit
> > > > > > 1.5.0-EA
> > > > > > > for vote in a few hours.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Would this be an EA or a RC?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I think we should definitely release an early access, prior to a
> > final
> > > > > release. However, as Raul pointed out, it should be 1.5.0-RC1
> > version.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *Raúl Kripalani*
> > > > > > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big
> > Data
> > > > and
> > > > > > Messaging Engineer
> > > > > > http://about.me/raulkripalani |
> > > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> > > > > > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

--
Sergey Kozlov

[yzhdanov]

If so we will have EA2.

--Yakov

2015-11-30 20:13 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>:

> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Dmitry, it will be 1.5.0-EA.
> >
>
> How about 1.5.0-EA1? We may have more than one EA release.

[Raul Kripalani]

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 5:05 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Raul, every build submitted for vote is RC (so, on first iteration this
> will be 1.5.0-EA-RC1). Once accepted RC gets stripped off and we get
> official release. My idea is to have EA available via maven and from the
> website.
>

Aha, I see. I'm not sure I like the idea of pushing the EA to Maven Central
and making it live there perpetually. After 3 years, we would still have an
1.5.0.EA there.
Red Hat is a company that uses EAs quite often. They have a separate Maven
repo for them, from which they prune the EAs once they become GA.

I prefer that we publish a RC1 to a staging repo and inform our users via
mailing list. All they'd have to do to take 1.5.0-RC1 for a spin is add the
staging repo to their pom.xml.

*Raúl Kripalani*
PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and
Messaging Engineer
http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk

[yzhdanov]

Raul, I see your point. However

1. I see nothing wrong in having EA perpetually available. I would even
prefer all vendors to keep all EA versions available just for tracking and
history purposes.
2. Even if we choose not to do maven release we can still go with EA and
just leave staging repo unreleased.

--Yakov

2015-11-30 20:17 GMT+03:00 Raul Kripalani <[hidden email]>:

> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 5:05 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Raul, every build submitted for vote is RC (so, on first iteration this
> > will be 1.5.0-EA-RC1). Once accepted RC gets stripped off and we get
> > official release. My idea is to have EA available via maven and from the
> > website.
> >
>
> Aha, I see. I'm not sure I like the idea of pushing the EA to Maven Central
> and making it live there perpetually. After 3 years, we would still have an
> 1.5.0.EA there.
> Red Hat is a company that uses EAs quite often. They have a separate Maven
> repo for them, from which they prune the EAs once they become GA.
>
> I prefer that we publish a RC1 to a staging repo and inform our users via
> mailing list. All they'd have to do to take 1.5.0-RC1 for a spin is add the
> staging repo to their pom.xml.
>
> *Raúl Kripalani*
> PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and
> Messaging Engineer
> http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
>