Fusion 1.1 Status

[zspitzer]

How is 1.1 going?, it been a while since RC1 I'm happy to do some more testing.

When 1.1 is released, I'm thinking about a few ideas which would make
adoption easier.

Once is to create a windows installer which is MGOS and MGE aware so people can
easily update (replace) older fusion installs.

Secondly, what do people think about checking in built releases of
fusion into subversion?

builds\stable
builds\development
builds\1.06
builds\1.1RC1

That way users can a simple svn update to update fusion.




--
Zac Spitzer -
http://zacster.blogspot.com (My Blog)
[phone]
_______________________________________________
fusion-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fusion-dev

[Paul Spencer-2]

Hi Zac,

I think Mike has been steadily working on bugs for 1.1 as well as  
finishing up features for 2.0.  I'd personally like to see 1.1  
finalized soon, so if you want to do some testing that would help a  
lot.  One of the things we added to 1.1 was a compatibility mode for  
the existing templates so that it can be a drop-in replacement for the  
existing fusion code, which should make upgrading easier!

I believe mgos 2.1 is tracking Fusion trunk which will be branched for  
a 2.0 version shortly too, so my fears of 1.1 slipping between  
releases seem to have materialized, but no matter - both contain  
important code and 1.1 might get rolled into another 2.0 minor update  
if I can convince Tom its a good idea :)

 From this point forward, I believe that mgos is using svn externals  
to include fusion, so checking in built versions would only apply up  
to the current point in time I think (unless I am missing the point  
somehow)

Paul


On 22-Oct-08, at 4:05 AM, Zac Spitzer wrote:

> How is 1.1 going?, it been a while since RC1 I'm happy to do some  
> more testing.
>
> When 1.1 is released, I'm thinking about a few ideas which would make
> adoption easier.
>
> Once is to create a windows installer which is MGOS and MGE aware so  
> people can
> easily update (replace) older fusion installs.
>
> Secondly, what do people think about checking in built releases of
> fusion into subversion?
>
> builds\stable
> builds\development
> builds\1.06
> builds\1.1RC1
>
> That way users can a simple svn update to update fusion.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Zac Spitzer -
> http://zacster.blogspot.com (My Blog)
> [phone]
> _______________________________________________
> fusion-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fusion-dev

__________________________________________

    Paul Spencer
    Chief Technology Officer
    DM Solutions Group Inc
    http://research.dmsolutions.ca/

_______________________________________________
fusion-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fusion-dev

[zspitzer]

the mg 2.1 release is why i was putting my hand up to test 1.1 :)

what I was suggesting with subversion is an easy way for someone like
myself who
is happy to update often to just replace the current fusion tree in
mapguide with a version
directly checked out of the fusion ' builds' tree. rather than having
to build it from the svn src.

I am not really much of a fan of the way fusion and other things are
snapshoted version wise tied to
the long points between mapguide releases.

having the compiled builds in the subversion would allow me to do
something like this to a mg install

cd /mgos2.0/webserverextensions/wwww
mv fusion fusion_release
svn co http://svn.osgeo.org/fusion/builds/development fusion

that way I just have to svn update to grab the latest build to test

z



On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 10:40 PM, Paul Spencer <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Zac,
>
> I think Mike has been steadily working on bugs for 1.1 as well as finishing
> up features for 2.0.  I'd personally like to see 1.1 finalized soon, so if
> you want to do some testing that would help a lot.  One of the things we
> added to 1.1 was a compatibility mode for the existing templates so that it
> can be a drop-in replacement for the existing fusion code, which should make
> upgrading easier!
>
> I believe mgos 2.1 is tracking Fusion trunk which will be branched for a 2.0
> version shortly too, so my fears of 1.1 slipping between releases seem to
> have materialized, but no matter - both contain important code and 1.1 might
> get rolled into another 2.0 minor update if I can convince Tom its a good
> idea :)
>
> From this point forward, I believe that mgos is using svn externals to
> include fusion, so checking in built versions would only apply up to the
> current point in time I think (unless I am missing the point somehow)
>
> Paul
>
>
> On 22-Oct-08, at 4:05 AM, Zac Spitzer wrote:
>
>> How is 1.1 going?, it been a while since RC1 I'm happy to do some more
>> testing.
>>
>> When 1.1 is released, I'm thinking about a few ideas which would make
>> adoption easier.
>>
>> Once is to create a windows installer which is MGOS and MGE aware so
>> people can
>> easily update (replace) older fusion installs.
>>
>> Secondly, what do people think about checking in built releases of
>> fusion into subversion?
>>
>> builds\stable
>> builds\development
>> builds\1.06
>> builds\1.1RC1
>>
>> That way users can a simple svn update to update fusion.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Zac Spitzer -
>> http://zacster.blogspot.com (My Blog)
>> [phone]
>> _______________________________________________
>> fusion-dev mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fusion-dev
>
>
> __________________________________________
>
>   Paul Spencer
>   Chief Technology Officer
>   DM Solutions Group Inc
>   http://research.dmsolutions.ca/
>
>

--
Zac Spitzer -
http://zacster.blogspot.com (My Blog)
[phone]
_______________________________________________
fusion-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fusion-dev

[Paul Spencer-2]

I must be slow on the uptake, but reading Jason's 'how to install'  
post made me realize that you are absolutely right.  For mapguide  
users at least we should be bundling Fusion packages with all the  
mapguide templates as separate packages - especially the ones that  
don't get released with specific versions of mapguide.

Not sure about storing them in the SVN vault or not, that would be  
something that perhaps the PSC should make a call on.

I think you should raise this on the dev list and I'll definitely  
support with +1

Paul

On 22-Oct-08, at 8:32 AM, Zac Spitzer wrote:

> the mg 2.1 release is why i was putting my hand up to test 1.1 :)
>
> what I was suggesting with subversion is an easy way for someone like
> myself who
> is happy to update often to just replace the current fusion tree in
> mapguide with a version
> directly checked out of the fusion ' builds' tree. rather than having
> to build it from the svn src.
>
> I am not really much of a fan of the way fusion and other things are
> snapshoted version wise tied to
> the long points between mapguide releases.
>
> having the compiled builds in the subversion would allow me to do
> something like this to a mg install
>
> cd /mgos2.0/webserverextensions/wwww
> mv fusion fusion_release
> svn co http://svn.osgeo.org/fusion/builds/development fusion
>
> that way I just have to svn update to grab the latest build to test
>
> z
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 10:40 PM, Paul Spencer <[hidden email]
> > wrote:
>> Hi Zac,
>>
>> I think Mike has been steadily working on bugs for 1.1 as well as  
>> finishing
>> up features for 2.0.  I'd personally like to see 1.1 finalized  
>> soon, so if
>> you want to do some testing that would help a lot.  One of the  
>> things we
>> added to 1.1 was a compatibility mode for the existing templates so  
>> that it
>> can be a drop-in replacement for the existing fusion code, which  
>> should make
>> upgrading easier!
>>
>> I believe mgos 2.1 is tracking Fusion trunk which will be branched  
>> for a 2.0
>> version shortly too, so my fears of 1.1 slipping between releases  
>> seem to
>> have materialized, but no matter - both contain important code and  
>> 1.1 might
>> get rolled into another 2.0 minor update if I can convince Tom its  
>> a good
>> idea :)
>>
>> From this point forward, I believe that mgos is using svn externals  
>> to
>> include fusion, so checking in built versions would only apply up  
>> to the
>> current point in time I think (unless I am missing the point somehow)
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> On 22-Oct-08, at 4:05 AM, Zac Spitzer wrote:
>>
>>> How is 1.1 going?, it been a while since RC1 I'm happy to do some  
>>> more
>>> testing.
>>>
>>> When 1.1 is released, I'm thinking about a few ideas which would  
>>> make
>>> adoption easier.
>>>
>>> Once is to create a windows installer which is MGOS and MGE aware so
>>> people can
>>> easily update (replace) older fusion installs.
>>>
>>> Secondly, what do people think about checking in built releases of
>>> fusion into subversion?
>>>
>>> builds\stable
>>> builds\development
>>> builds\1.06
>>> builds\1.1RC1
>>>
>>> That way users can a simple svn update to update fusion.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Zac Spitzer -
>>> http://zacster.blogspot.com (My Blog)
>>> [phone]
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> fusion-dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fusion-dev
>>
>>
>> __________________________________________
>>
>>  Paul Spencer
>>  Chief Technology Officer
>>  DM Solutions Group Inc
>>  http://research.dmsolutions.ca/
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Zac Spitzer -
> http://zacster.blogspot.com (My Blog)
> [phone]

__________________________________________

    Paul Spencer
    Chief Technology Officer
    DM Solutions Group Inc
    http://research.dmsolutions.ca/

_______________________________________________
fusion-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fusion-dev

[zspitzer]

the mapguide templates have been recently moved into
http://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide/browser/trunk/MgDev/Oem/fusionMG/templates/mapguide

I'm all for making this as painless as possible, not having the preview template breaks studio,
plus they are great examples of fusion, not having them in the build is a loss

z

On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 11:53 PM, Paul Spencer <[hidden email]> wrote:

I must be slow on the uptake, but reading Jason's 'how to install' post made me realize that you are absolutely right.  For mapguide users at least we should be bundling Fusion packages with all the mapguide templates as separate packages - especially the ones that don't get released with specific versions of mapguide.

Not sure about storing them in the SVN vault or not, that would be something that perhaps the PSC should make a call on.

I think you should raise this on the dev list and I'll definitely support with +1

Paul

On 22-Oct-08, at 8:32 AM, Zac Spitzer wrote:

the mg 2.1 release is why i was putting my hand up to test 1.1 :)

what I was suggesting with subversion is an easy way for someone like
myself who
is happy to update often to just replace the current fusion tree in
mapguide with a version
directly checked out of the fusion ' builds' tree. rather than having
to build it from the svn src.

I am not really much of a fan of the way fusion and other things are
snapshoted version wise tied to
the long points between mapguide releases.

having the compiled builds in the subversion would allow me to do
something like this to a mg install

cd /mgos2.0/webserverextensions/wwww
mv fusion fusion_release
svn co http://svn.osgeo.org/fusion/builds/development fusion

that way I just have to svn update to grab the latest build to test

z



On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 10:40 PM, Paul Spencer <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi Zac,

I think Mike has been steadily working on bugs for 1.1 as well as finishing
up features for 2.0.  I'd personally like to see 1.1 finalized soon, so if
you want to do some testing that would help a lot.  One of the things we
added to 1.1 was a compatibility mode for the existing templates so that it
can be a drop-in replacement for the existing fusion code, which should make
upgrading easier!

I believe mgos 2.1 is tracking Fusion trunk which will be branched for a 2.0
version shortly too, so my fears of 1.1 slipping between releases seem to
have materialized, but no matter - both contain important code and 1.1 might
get rolled into another 2.0 minor update if I can convince Tom its a good
idea :)

>From this point forward, I believe that mgos is using svn externals to
include fusion, so checking in built versions would only apply up to the
current point in time I think (unless I am missing the point somehow)

Paul


On 22-Oct-08, at 4:05 AM, Zac Spitzer wrote:

How is 1.1 going?, it been a while since RC1 I'm happy to do some more
testing.

When 1.1 is released, I'm thinking about a few ideas which would make
adoption easier.

Once is to create a windows installer which is MGOS and MGE aware so
people can
easily update (replace) older fusion installs.

Secondly, what do people think about checking in built releases of
fusion into subversion?

builds\stable
builds\development
builds\1.06
builds\1.1RC1

That way users can a simple svn update to update fusion.




--
Zac Spitzer -
http://zacster.blogspot.com (My Blog)
[phone]
_______________________________________________
fusion-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fusion-dev

__________________________________________

 Paul Spencer
 Chief Technology Officer
 DM Solutions Group Inc
 http://research.dmsolutions.ca/

--
Zac Spitzer -
http://zacster.blogspot.com (My Blog)
[phone]

__________________________________________

  Paul Spencer
  Chief Technology Officer
  DM Solutions Group Inc
  http://research.dmsolutions.ca/

--
Zac Spitzer -
http://zacster.blogspot.com (My Blog)
[phone]

_______________________________________________
fusion-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fusion-dev