Re: [Springframework-developer] Current release plan - why delay package renaming?

[Colin S. <col...@ex...>]

I wanted to play the devil's advocate and suggest that the package 
renaming be done now instead of later.  I understand that the main issue 
is that it takes a while to do it through SourceForge in terms of 
hanlding the CVS dirs on the server itself. However, the possibility of 
just doing a checkin to the new location has already been mentioned and 
would be very easy. Of course the history for files would still be 
available at the old location.

Spring really seems to be getting a lot of momentum lately. I think it's 
really good stuff and most people who look at it seem to agree :-)   So 
I think a package name now will potentially affect a _lot_ less people 
than one later.  I know in our case, we have a pretty big project which 
has started using Spring. In about a week, we need to do a big branch. 
If both branches need to have Spring packages updated it will complicate 
the merge later. I think other people will have this sort of issue.

Another consideration is that 0.9.1 (as I understand it) introduces at 
least a few non-backwards compatible changes. Doing the package rename 
now would maybe make it possible for subsequent releases to remain 
backwards compatible.

Regards,
Colin

jürgen höller [werk3AT] wrote:

>Everybody,
>
>As I just wrote in the reply to Alef's "PropertyEditors in JSPs" suggestion, we will very likely release a 0.9.2 at the end of August, with further polishing and enhancements.
>
>FYI, I'll be travelling to Australia for the whole of September, so I'd prefer to get 0.9.2 out before that, and our first org.springframework 1.0 RC right after my return. Is a 1.0 RC1 target at the beginning of October fine for everybody? I hope it's not too late, but we will need the time anyway for documentation and all that stuff. 1.0 final could be possible in November then.
>
>BTW, we don't *need* to make SourceForge change our CVS directories to apply the package name change. We could also keep the current "main" module as it is, including all its version history, and introduce a new "main10" module with a fresh import of an org.springframework version. This would also make sense in terms of dead directories that a CVS update always traverses: There wouldn't be any then.
>
>Juergen
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: jürgen höller [werk3AT] 
>Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 11:34 PM
>To: pr...@se...; Spring Developers
>Subject: Re: [Springframework-developer] Current release plan
>
>
>Hi Trevor,
> 
>First of all, good questions resp. important ones indeed!
> 
><quote>
>1. What still needs to be done for 0.9.1.  From that list, what is currently
>"assigned" to someone and what still needs help?
></quote>
> 
>Not a lot, actually. It's mainly about polishing the Petclinic and Countries sample apps, and testing the current codebase in everyone's own projects. Everything should be assigned so far, except the latter of course :-)
> 
>I'm currently polishing a lot of the source code. I've also added 2 new features that aren't committed yet but will be by the end of this week, namely Hibernate flush mode support on HibernateTemplate and HibernateInterceptor, and read-only transactions (suppressing Hibernate flush on the transaction level). Furthermore, I've refined TransactionInterceptor and MapTransactionAttributeSource a bit, supporting more configuration options then before.
> 
><quote>
>2. Same as #1 but for the 1.0 release.
></quote>
>
>The first 1.0 RC will involve a package name change from com.interface21 to org.springframework. Besides that, there won't be a lot in terms of new features -maybe even less than from 0.9 to 0.9.1. Rod might already introduce some source-level attribute stuff to the AOP framework, but that isn't a requirement at all. Proper JMS and Web Service support are candidates too but can easily wait until 1.1.
> 
><quote>
>3. What is the target time-frame for the 0.9.1 and 1.0 releases (obviously
>this is sketchy since it's "volunteer" work, but "gut guesses" - probably
>from Juergen :) - based on work left is what I'm hoping for.  The previous
>estimate was the 1.0RC1 by now.
></quote>
> 
>0.9.1 should be out any day now. I encourage everyone to try it the current CVS version before the weekend. A release some time next week should really be achievable. We *need* to get out a follow-up release quickly, if just because of all the enhancements to the Hibernate support that have a good chance of getting adopted promptly. My Hibernate article in the community area and my postings to the Hibernate forum have already been discussing some of them for a while.
>
><quote>
>4. From Juergen's email which I referenced, it states "As far as I see, we
>don't need additional functionality for 1.0".  The main thing holding me
>back from adopting the current code base (I'm currently using a
>personally-modified version of 0.8) is the amount and frequency of changes
>to core functionality and the public api.  Some new features or minor bug
>fixes are ok/normal, but these sweeping changes are destructive to
>production code.  How close are we to finalizing the public api and the core
>code?  Is it likely that these major changes should be done for 0.9.1?
></quote>
> 
>Maybe I'm promising too much, but I don't see any major changes on the horizon. The introduction of the new DTD was probably the biggest change in the last few months, everything else was just about slight changes to the public API. I agree that we need stable APIs though to allow production apps to rely on them without *any* hassle. 0.9.1 should be as stable as can be in that respect, besides the package name change for 1.0 RC which should just involve a search-and-replace.
>
><quote>
>To expand on my fourth question with a recommendation (hopefully it makes
>sense to everyone).  If possible we should finalize the public api for
>version 0.9.1 rather than at the 1.0RC1.  This will allow usage in new
>development without fear of incompatibilities in the next couple months. (...)
></quote>
> 
>As I indicated above, I fully agree. We've been changing our apps at werk3AT quite often too, it would be fine it that wouldn't be necessary anymore as soon as possible. And I'd really like to get you on board again, in terms of working with a current Spring version :-)
> 
>Regards,
>Juergen
>NHS^隊[){([Zzn襴4D׬w%ا6il&x+ljwEjzz0'Zɩz{^0v\bJ۝DNmڲ޵brK&
>?ƴ]4Mڽ݊Z޷NM5Jjgzx%Rڙ(G^hlqzm?X(~zwXb?jgz
>N?HS^?隊[)?{(??[?Z?z??n襴?4D?׬?w%?ا?6?i???l?&???x?+??ljwE??????j??zz0?'?????Zɩ?z{^??0?v?\???b??J۝??DNm??ڲ?޵?brK???&?
>??ƴ?]4?Mڽ?݊????Z??޷N??M???5J???jg???z??????x%??R?????ڙ?(?G^??h????l???q???z?m????X???(??~??zw??X?????b???????jg???z??
>