Re: [Mailman-Developers] Mailman "true virtual hosting" and Google SoC
On 4/24/06, Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org> wrote:
On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 16:21 +0300, Heikki Lampén wrote:
I'm wondering about this "true virtual hosting" issue and what is going to happen to it.
I see there's some talk about Google SoC in the wiki [0]. Unfortunately I don't see Mailman in the Google SoC participant list [1]. Has Mailman applied as a mentoring organization? The deadline is 1st of May.
True, although I was thinking that if someone wants to do this, we could do it under the auspices of the Python Software Foundation. There really is no "Mailman organization" and the latter's SoC project page does list Mailman as a possibility. Sounds good.
Anyway, it'd be awesome if SoC could finish what the vhost branch has began. Or is it totally out of the question that such a patch would be integrated to 2.1? Even as a branch (that'd be kept up to date with 2.1) it could be very useful.
It's not out of the question, although no way can it go into the mainline 2.1 branch. Ideally, the work would be done on the Mailman trunk for 2.2, although I wouldn't be opposed to an "unofficial" 2.1 patch branch if the volunteers were so motivated. It's too big of project to go into 2.1 proper though. Fair enough.
Why or why not should the vhost branch development happen on the same subversion repository? In CVS there was the awful branching problem. I think Subversion is the most attracting version control system. Then again what I think doesn't matter but what you guys think is what matters. Of course moving off to another platform is always extra work and has to be motivated properly.
My hesitance is much more the code disruption, upgrade testing, and support costs involved in pulling this into 2.1. We just can't be adding new features to 2.1 at this point. What we /really/ need to do is get 2.2 moving so that we can release it fairly soon (this year, I hope).
Also the usage of JIRA and Confluence should make it even more interesting as organizing the project becomes a whole lot easier that way. Maybe add a project for the vhost branch.
Maybe I'm just being impatient but as I see it, this vhost stuff should really interest a lot of people.
Definitely. Everyone wants to see it, and it will definitely happen for 2.2. It would be awesome if a SoC volunteer wanted to take it on and I would be more than happy to mentor the work. Are you a student and are you interested in working on it? I'm unfortunately already employed during summer time (would've had been an interesting project). Maybe someone on the list is or knows a promising victim?
-- heze heikki.lampen@gmail.com
"Heikki Lampén" <heikki.lampen@gmail.com> writes:
On 4/24/06, Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org> wrote:
On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 16:21 +0300, Heikki Lampén wrote:
I'm wondering about this "true virtual hosting" issue and what is going to happen to it.
It will happen some time, it's just a question of when.
It's not out of the question, although no way can it go into the mainline 2.1 branch. Ideally, the work would be done on the Mailman trunk for 2.2, although I wouldn't be opposed to an "unofficial" 2.1 patch branch if the volunteers were so motivated. It's too big of project to go into 2.1 proper though. Fair enough.
Exactly.
Maybe I'm just being impatient but as I see it, this vhost stuff should really interest a lot of people.
Definitely. Everyone wants to see it, and it will definitely happen for 2.2. It would be awesome if a SoC volunteer wanted to take it on and I would be more than happy to mentor the work. Are you a student and are you interested in working on it?
I'm unfortunately already employed during summer time (would've had been an interesting project). Maybe someone on the list is or knows a promising victim?
I've been busy with other things, but I'm planning to finish the vhost stuff some time in June (if nobody has beat me to it until then).
"Finish" would mean that we can go into production here with an unofficial 2.1-vhost branch based on 2.1 (we probably want this sooner than an official 2.2 release can be reasonably be expected to happen).
This planning of mine includes getting the vhost branch ported to 2.2 while developing the 2.1 version. The idea is that we can just use the official Mailman code by the Mailman team after the 2.2 release.
Practical issues:
- I need to get the copyright assignment form stuff done.
- Either I have to learn and cope with svk or someone with sufficient karma would need to trust me enough to provide me with svn write access.
Then I'd probably best create an svk/svn branch each off 2.1 and 2.2, then start on the 2.1-vhost branch and maintain 2.2-vhost to keep in sync with my main project of 2.1-vhost.
OK, and first I'd want to wait until 2006-05-23 to make sure there is no SoC project concurrently working on the vhost issue.
Gruß,
Uli
participants (2)
-
Hans Ulrich Niedermann -
Heikki Lampén