All,
I've been slammed with my regular Red Hat duties which must take priority over my suds work. As a result, I've gotten pretty far behind on the mailing list and tickets. My apologies. Don't interpret this as a lack of interest or dedication to the suds project. I fully intend to get caught up and continue to move the project forward.
The 0.4 release is mostly ready to go out but I'm not completely happy with the 'plugins' API. I can either release as is with the caveat that it /may/ change. Or, I can wait and get it the way I want it first.
Thanks for your patience and continued interest in suds.
Regards,
Jeff
On Friday 18 June 2010, Jeff Ortel elucidated thus:
The 0.4 release is mostly ready to go out but I'm not completely happy with the 'plugins' API. I can either release as is with the caveat that it /may/ change. Or, I can wait and get it the way I want it first.
Since the plugin feature is going to be a "big deal," I would lean toward getting it right. You certainly want it to be well thought out, clean, and easy to use. Releasing a poorly implemented feature gives a project a bad reputation, and maybe worse: give the feature a bad reputation, which means it will be used less or not at all.
We'll wait. I'd rather have a feature that works well than one I have to hack around to get it to do what I want.
j
Just like Joshua I think that some extra time can be given to get an important feature polished.
I am happily working with 0.3.9 and I think so far suds is covering the needs of most users (leaving apart those who are looking for things that suds can't provide like writing a service, for example)
As I opened a couple of tickets for enhancements (with patches included) I would like to know your view on such changes making it to 0.4
- Asynchrounous usage of suds (312) - Exception improvement by having a general SudsError and deriving all exceptions from there (310). I see someone opened 324 reporting some base "Exceptions" being launched which I can confirm - Transport with gzip support (311 and 318)
Best regards
Daniel
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 18:15, Joshua J. Kugler joshua@eeinternet.comwrote:
On Friday 18 June 2010, Jeff Ortel elucidated thus:
The 0.4 release is mostly ready to go out but I'm not completely happy with the 'plugins' API. I can either release as is with the caveat that it /may/ change. Or, I can wait and get it the way I want it first.
Since the plugin feature is going to be a "big deal," I would lean toward getting it right. You certainly want it to be well thought out, clean, and easy to use. Releasing a poorly implemented feature gives a project a bad reputation, and maybe worse: give the feature a bad reputation, which means it will be used less or not at all.
We'll wait. I'd rather have a feature that works well than one I have to hack around to get it to do what I want.
j
-- Joshua Kugler Part-Time System Admin/Programmer http://www.eeinternet.com PGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu/ ID 0x73B13B6A _______________________________________________ suds mailing list suds@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/suds
WADL, WSDL 2.0 REST
[1] http://www.w3.org/Submission/wadl/
Async: cool and useful gzip: def, probably the easiest upgrade
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 6:00 PM, Daniel Rodriguez danjrod@gmail.com wrote:
Just like Joshua I think that some extra time can be given to get an important feature polished.
I am happily working with 0.3.9 and I think so far suds is covering the needs of most users (leaving apart those who are looking for things that suds can't provide like writing a service, for example)
As I opened a couple of tickets for enhancements (with patches included) I would like to know your view on such changes making it to 0.4
- Asynchrounous usage of suds (312)
- Exception improvement by having a general SudsError and deriving all
exceptions from there (310). I see someone opened 324 reporting some base "Exceptions" being launched which I can confirm
- Transport with gzip support (311 and 318)
Best regards
Daniel
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 18:15, Joshua J. Kugler joshua@eeinternet.comwrote:
On Friday 18 June 2010, Jeff Ortel elucidated thus:
The 0.4 release is mostly ready to go out but I'm not completely happy with the 'plugins' API. I can either release as is with the caveat that it /may/ change. Or, I can wait and get it the way I want it first.
Since the plugin feature is going to be a "big deal," I would lean toward getting it right. You certainly want it to be well thought out, clean, and easy to use. Releasing a poorly implemented feature gives a project a bad reputation, and maybe worse: give the feature a bad reputation, which means it will be used less or not at all.
We'll wait. I'd rather have a feature that works well than one I have to hack around to get it to do what I want.
j
-- Joshua Kugler Part-Time System Admin/Programmer http://www.eeinternet.com PGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu/ ID 0x73B13B6A _______________________________________________ suds mailing list suds@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/suds
suds mailing list suds@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/suds
-
Chris Wj -
Daniel Rodriguez -
Jeff Ortel -
Joshua J. Kugler