naviserver-devel

[naviserver-devel] Wich source to start from, 4.0 or 4.1?

[Stephen D. <sd...@gm...>]

The question was, do we start with 4.0 or 4.1?

On reflection, I think 4.0 would be best.  Multiprotocol support is up
in the air anyway until Jim makes a move, and 4.1 has bugs with adp
etc.  4.0 will give us a stable codebase to start making changes.

Merging 4.1 later will be good practice... :-)

Re: [naviserver-devel] Wich source to start from, 4.0 or 4.1?

[Zoran V. <zv...@ar...>]

On Wednesday 09 February 2005 21:59, Stephen Deasey wrote:
> The question was, do we start with 4.0 or 4.1?
> 
> On reflection, I think 4.0 would be best.  Multiprotocol support is up
> in the air anyway until Jim makes a move, and 4.1 has bugs with adp
> etc.  4.0 will give us a stable codebase to start making changes.
> 
> Merging 4.1 later will be good practice... :-)

OK. This is the statement.

I think one idea would be to get one of yours versions in the 
CVS since you did change (I believe) much more in the code 
than I did. I can then apply, after getting some RFE's in 
(for the better tracking and cocumentation) and clearing it with
you, some of the minor things I have sitting.

Maybe it would be also goog for you and Vlad to exchange tarballs
and look if there are any major collisions prior to commiting
the CVS.

Zoran

Re: [naviserver-devel] Wich source to start from, 4.0 or 4.1?

[Vlad S. <vl...@cr...>]

My Cox cable died last night, so i have no acces to the Internet from 
home till Monday, i hope, could be longer.

I have 4.0.10 version with new binder, modified ns_socklisten from 4.1 
and hacked UDP support.

All changes are transparent, webserver still works as usual, so we can 
start with it.

Multiprotocol there is as small as possible, but i started separatting 
Conn and Sock handling already,
being able to allocate Conn and submit data to it to be run by conn 
thread is my goal. In this case,
all drivers can be developed easily without hacking the core, even from 
Tcp Callback you can submit your
data to conn queue, just pass Driver which will handle the protocol.

The issue how i can get the sources from my home, not sure i have event 
floppies, will have to use laptop as
transfer media:-)))


Zoran Vasiljevic wrote:
> On Wednesday 09 February 2005 21:59, Stephen Deasey wrote:
> 
>>The question was, do we start with 4.0 or 4.1?
>>
>>On reflection, I think 4.0 would be best.  Multiprotocol support is up
>>in the air anyway until Jim makes a move, and 4.1 has bugs with adp
>>etc.  4.0 will give us a stable codebase to start making changes.
>>
>>Merging 4.1 later will be good practice... :-)
> 
> 
> OK. This is the statement.
> 
> I think one idea would be to get one of yours versions in the 
> CVS since you did change (I believe) much more in the code 
> than I did. I can then apply, after getting some RFE's in 
> (for the better tracking and cocumentation) and clearing it with
> you, some of the minor things I have sitting.
> 
> Maybe it would be also goog for you and Vlad to exchange tarballs
> and look if there are any major collisions prior to commiting
> the CVS.
> 
> Zoran
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
> Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
> Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> naviserver-devel mailing list
> nav...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel

-- 
Vlad Seryakov
571 262-8608 office
vl...@cr...
http://www.crystalballinc.com/vlad/

Re: [naviserver-devel] Wich source to start from, 4.0 or 4.1?

[Stephen D. <sd...@gm...>]

Hmm, I don't know that it would be the best idea to start with what I
(or Vlad) has.  My repo is aolserver-HEAD as of a few months ago,
before the last set of major changes.

I'd rather split my stuff up and submit it separately, have you guys
look it over before I apply it.  I'm sure there are errors you will
spot and improvements you will suggest.  And I don't think it will be
too hard to do.

Also, I might re-evaluate some of my decisions.  Obviously, when it's
just for yourself you can be a little looser in how you do certain
things, change APIs etc., because you know all the callers of the code
or can decide that you're happy with the disruption it might cause.  I
haven't done anything drastic!  But still, I'd want to be a little
more careful and, the tracker provides a nice paper trail.

I really think we're sort of stuck for the moment re the protocols
stuff.  I'm hoping that what ever Jim is doing will be public soon so
we can make some informed decisions.

If you do desperately want a tarball or something, I guess I can send
that along.



On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 10:10:58 +0100, Zoran Vasiljevic <zv...@ar...> wrote:
> On Wednesday 09 February 2005 21:59, Stephen Deasey wrote:
> > The question was, do we start with 4.0 or 4.1?
> >
> > On reflection, I think 4.0 would be best.  Multiprotocol support is up
> > in the air anyway until Jim makes a move, and 4.1 has bugs with adp
> > etc.  4.0 will give us a stable codebase to start making changes.
> >
> > Merging 4.1 later will be good practice... :-)
> 
> OK. This is the statement.
> 
> I think one idea would be to get one of yours versions in the
> CVS since you did change (I believe) much more in the code
> than I did. I can then apply, after getting some RFE's in
> (for the better tracking and cocumentation) and clearing it with
> you, some of the minor things I have sitting.
> 
> Maybe it would be also goog for you and Vlad to exchange tarballs
> and look if there are any major collisions prior to commiting
> the CVS.
> 
> Zoran
>

Re: [naviserver-devel] Wich source to start from, 4.0 or 4.1?

[Vlad S. <vl...@cr...>]

Here is the tarball with my changes, i also removed root restriction 
from nsmain.

ftp://ftp.crystalballinc.com/pub/vlad/aolserver-4.0.10-vlad.tar.gz

We can put aside multiprotocol issue for a while and do other 
improvements, so once
Jim will come up with something or we will be ready to roll out our 
implementation we
put it into main codebase.

Anyway our both changes are more like hacks, at least mine is to keep 
main http stuff working, so
i will need to re-evaluate how i want to have multiprotocol now.

But having CVS up and running will give us something to work on

Stephen Deasey wrote:
> Hmm, I don't know that it would be the best idea to start with what I
> (or Vlad) has.  My repo is aolserver-HEAD as of a few months ago,
> before the last set of major changes.
> 
> I'd rather split my stuff up and submit it separately, have you guys
> look it over before I apply it.  I'm sure there are errors you will
> spot and improvements you will suggest.  And I don't think it will be
> too hard to do.
> 
> Also, I might re-evaluate some of my decisions.  Obviously, when it's
> just for yourself you can be a little looser in how you do certain
> things, change APIs etc., because you know all the callers of the code
> or can decide that you're happy with the disruption it might cause.  I
> haven't done anything drastic!  But still, I'd want to be a little
> more careful and, the tracker provides a nice paper trail.
> 
> I really think we're sort of stuck for the moment re the protocols
> stuff.  I'm hoping that what ever Jim is doing will be public soon so
> we can make some informed decisions.
> 
> If you do desperately want a tarball or something, I guess I can send
> that along.
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 10:10:58 +0100, Zoran Vasiljevic <zv...@ar...> wrote:
> 
>>On Wednesday 09 February 2005 21:59, Stephen Deasey wrote:
>>
>>>The question was, do we start with 4.0 or 4.1?
>>>
>>>On reflection, I think 4.0 would be best.  Multiprotocol support is up
>>>in the air anyway until Jim makes a move, and 4.1 has bugs with adp
>>>etc.  4.0 will give us a stable codebase to start making changes.
>>>
>>>Merging 4.1 later will be good practice... :-)
>>
>>OK. This is the statement.
>>
>>I think one idea would be to get one of yours versions in the
>>CVS since you did change (I believe) much more in the code
>>than I did. I can then apply, after getting some RFE's in
>>(for the better tracking and cocumentation) and clearing it with
>>you, some of the minor things I have sitting.
>>
>>Maybe it would be also goog for you and Vlad to exchange tarballs
>>and look if there are any major collisions prior to commiting
>>the CVS.
>>
>>Zoran
>>
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
> Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
> Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> naviserver-devel mailing list
> nav...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel

-- 
Vlad Seryakov
571 262-8608 office
vl...@cr...
http://www.crystalballinc.com/vlad/

Re: [naviserver-devel] Wich source to start from, 4.0 or 4.1?

[Zoran V. <zv...@ar...>]

On Friday 11 February 2005 07:01, Stephen Deasey wrote:
> Hmm, I don't know that it would be the best idea to start with what I
> (or Vlad) has.  My repo is aolserver-HEAD as of a few months ago,
> before the last set of major changes.
> 
> I'd rather split my stuff up and submit it separately, have you guys
> look it over before I apply it.  I'm sure there are errors you will
> spot and improvements you will suggest.  And I don't think it will be
> too hard to do.
> 
> Also, I might re-evaluate some of my decisions.  Obviously, when it's
> just for yourself you can be a little looser in how you do certain
> things, change APIs etc., because you know all the callers of the code
> or can decide that you're happy with the disruption it might cause.  I
> haven't done anything drastic!  But still, I'd want to be a little
> more careful and, the tracker provides a nice paper trail.

Good. So we could start with what is in the cvs for 4.0 now. 
I've checked out the 40_r10 out of CVS. I can import this clean,
rewind the ChangeLog and start from there. 

Here some rought guidelines we should follow
(feel free to change and/or add your own)

Any functional-level changes should be posted as RFE's and we should 
all agree on them before we apply them to the codebase.
Bugs we discover should be tracked in our bugbase and fixed accordingly.
It would be nice if we can post a bug-report to AS project as well.

Functional chages applied to the aolserver pendant project are to
be discussed between us shortly and then we can decide if this 
is something we might need to have or not.
Bugfixes applied to the aolserver pendant project could/should be
also fixed here. I think we all can share this work on as-can
basis.  

This is fair for the begining, I suppose. Later on, if we get more
people on the wagon, we can always work-out some other procedure.

Regarding CVS import: should I import the 4.0.10 state?

Cheers,
Zoran

Re: [naviserver-devel] Wich source to start from, 4.0 or 4.1?

[Stephen D. <sd...@gm...>]

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 14:56:34 +0100, Zoran Vasiljevic <zv...@ar...> wrote:
>
> Regarding CVS import: should I import the 4.0.10 state?


You mean take the cvs backup tarball from AOLserver cvs, rather than
start from an export of 4.0.10?  It would be nice I guess to have all
that history.  But can you do that without also pulling in 4.1-HEAD?

Re: [naviserver-devel] Wich source to start from, 4.0 or 4.1?

[Zoran V. <zv...@ar...>]

On Saturday 12 February 2005 21:41, Stephen Deasey wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 14:56:34 +0100, Zoran Vasiljevic <zv...@ar...> wrote:
> >
> > Regarding CVS import: should I import the 4.0.10 state?
> 
> 
> You mean take the cvs backup tarball from AOLserver cvs, rather than
> start from an export of 4.0.10?  It would be nice I guess to have all
> that history.  But can you do that without also pulling in 4.1-HEAD?

What I actually ment was importing 4.0.10 clean, w/o cvs history.
Even reset ChangeLog.


> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
> Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
> Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> naviserver-devel mailing list
> nav...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel
> 

-- 
  With kind regards,
  Mit besten Gruessen,
  Meilleures Salutations,
  ___________________________________________
  Zoran Vasiljevic, Vice President, CTO

  E-mail: mailto:zv...@ar...
  Web:    http://www.archiware.com
  Phone:  +49 89 319 084 98
  Fax:    +49 89 319 084 99
  S-mail: ArchiWare(R) GmbH
          Gutenbergstr. 3
          D-85716 Munich, Germany
  ___________________________________________
  PresSTORE(R) - Backup  Synchronize  Archive