[teiid-designer-dev] Re: [teiid-dev] 6.1 Release

[John Verhaeg]

What I'm really trying to address with the release version issue is  
the official direction that RedHat/JBoss have stated they want to go.   
No matter what we call it, be it an "update release" or "patch", the  
direction is to not offer either of these in the project side of the  
world.  If something is broken in one release, the earliest time to  
see its fix will be the next minor release.  I believe the rationale  
for this is partly to further the idea that if you really need patch- 
level support, buy the product.

On Apr 23, 2009, at 10:27 AM, Larry O'Leary wrote:

> You make a very good point as far as the initial release.  We should  
> be
> looking at an initial baseline for all projects involved that are
> considered required components.  Teiid doesn't do a lot of good  
> without
> a VDB.
>
> As for patch releases, your are correct, they shouldn't really be done
> but we shouldn't confuse a patch with a revision release.  A 6.0.1
> release would give us an opportunity to role critical usability and
> execution bug fixes into an already released 6.0.  We would think of
> this as an update release and not a patch.
>
> On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 10:02 -0500, John Verhaeg wrote:
>> I have to mostly agree with Hawkins on this - these projects should
>> not be tied to each other's release schedules, even from the
>> beginning.  However, the reality is treating Teiid 6.0.0 as  
>> "released"
>> is a misnomer until Designer 6.0.0 is released (which we should be
>> very close to doing).  Teiid is pretty much useless without at least
>> *some* version of Designer being available.  We want to change that
>> fact in the future, but that's how things sit today.  In other words,
>> for all practical purposes - and for this very first release only -  
>> we
>> need to treat the Teiid solution as a whole - both Teiid Server and
>> Designer - as *unreleased* until Designer is released.  Once Designer
>> is out there, it shouldn't matter how often either project releases.
>> Certainly the Designer release schedule in particular will remain
>> important to the user for the short term, since Designer is, for now,
>> the only way to produce the metadata and transformations that the
>> server consumes.  Another way of putting this is, for the near term,
>> Teiid releases will be irrelevant to customers until a supporting
>> version of Designer is released or unless they don't depend upon
>> tooling in the first place.  I definitely believe that while the
>> server relies on the Designer as its sole source of input, the  
>> project
>> needs to be diligent in documenting in its release notes what  
>> features
>> are available and accessible, either due to their support by Designer
>> or their independence from tooling, and those that are "available"  
>> but
>> not accessible until a supporting version of Designer is released.   
>> If
>> we don't do this, we'll just be creating our FUD within our own
>> community.
>>
>> Regarding the connector testing issues John originally referred to,  
>> if
>> there really is a Designer dependency, then that connector should
>> probably should even be advertised as available until a supporting
>> version of the Designer is available.  My disclaimer is I don't  
>> really
>> understand the particular issue with the connector, so I might be way
>> off here...
>>
>> I also want to comment on the potential for a 6.0.1 release of  
>> Teiid -
>> if we do this at all, it should be the last time we every do it.
>> Again, since this is the first release of both products in the open
>> source world, this first time might be an exception, but in general  
>> we
>> shouldn't be releasing patches in projects, i.e., there should never
>> be any third segment to our release versions.  If ever, for instance,
>> there should be a bug in Teiid that from the Designer point of view
>> would be considered a blocker, then Designer would need to wait for
>> the next release of Teiid that contains a fix for that bug before
>> Designer could be released.
>>
>> BTW, the "aggressive" schedule for Designer 6.1.0 is a bit of a lark.
>> That date was set a long time ago, and there's pretty much no chance
>> of us coming anywhere close to it, especially considering the impact
>> of some of the changes we're planning towards removing the unwanted
>> dependencies between Teiid and Teiid Designer.
>>
>> On Apr 23, 2009, at 8:54 AM, Steven Hawkins wrote:
>>
>>> Everyone here is attempting to build a thriving community.  It's
>>> just that there are differing opinions about how to do it.  The
>>> major issue is whether Teiid "releases" should be mothballed prior
>>> to Designer availability.  So far there is no agreement on that.
>>> Van's assertion that Teiid or the Server isn't valuable without a
>>> Designer release is really is really the same line of thought.
>>>
>>> The Teiid lead's perspective is that we need to have defined Teiid
>>> releases - in terms of connector api, server api, functionality,
>>> etc. - so that the Designer, connector, or server developers have
>>> something stable to target.  To that end a 6.0.0 release of Teiid
>>> does not impede the 6.0 release of Designer, rather it is
>>> essential.  Whether it's "usable" on its own only matters to how we
>>> promote its use.  Furthermore all changes made based upon Designer
>>> integration problems have been made to both 6.0.1 and 6.1.0.  So we
>>> will have the ability to provide a release version of Teiid that is
>>> completely compatible with the Designer near its release.  Finally
>>> the Teiid developers have been working constantly with the Designer
>>> developers to hammer out all release issues.
>>>
>>> I should have also been more particular about the phase "forward
>>> looking".  I mean to say the 7 release will have alternative
>>> metadata mechanisms.
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> teiid-dev mailing list
>> teiid-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/teiid-dev
>
>