You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cayenne.apache.org by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org> on 2007/02/22 13:57:49 UTC
Re: CAY-659
Hi Malcolm,
I am taking this to the list.
On Feb 22, 2007, at 1:32 AM, Malcolm Edgar wrote:
> Hi Andrus,
>
> I have completed most of CAY-659, against the STABLE 1.2 branch.
>
> The only piece not done is the deferred loading of descriptions by the
> Cayenne runtime, I have a boolean flag option in the MapLoader to
> support this functionality. Possibly you can have a look at it to see
> how you want it used.
>
> We have been using this build for a week or so now, with now issues.
> I was thinking I could check these changes into STABLE 1.2, and once
> you are happy with them apply these changes to STABLE 2.0.
>
> I can see its going to be a pain maintaining these two branches.
Actually there is another reason why we can't check it in to 1.2
branch - 1.2 is frozen stable branch and we only add bug fixes to it.
We shouldn't be adding any new features to 1.2 (or 2.0 for that
matter). So officially we can only maintain it on trunk.
At the same time I understand you have a personal need to use it with
1.2? If so you can create your own branch in SVN (1.2-STABLE-CAY-659
or something) and maintain it there. As long as for every change you
log a patch in Jira, so that we can transfer it to trunk at some
point (or you can actually apply it to trunk yourself).
Andrus
Re: CAY-659
Posted by Ahmed Mohombe <am...@yahoo.com>.
> Actually there is another reason why we can't check it in to 1.2 branch
> - 1.2 is frozen stable branch and we only add bug fixes to it. We
> shouldn't be adding any new features to 1.2 (or 2.0 for that matter).
But the Trunk is not producing the *same* clean and simple distribution as 1.2/2.0 yet (because
of the maven migration?).
Ahmed.
Re: Building 3.0 from trunk
Posted by Ahmed Mohombe <am...@yahoo.com>.
> I thought all the Incubator ID's were copied over, though.
Well, during the incubation I was able to use my *Apache* ID (that worked
in the Cayenne project too).
Anyway, I already created a new ID - it's faster :).
Ahmed.
Re: Building 3.0 from trunk
Posted by Michael Gentry <bl...@gmail.com>.
Here is the link I have:
https://issues.apache.org/cayenne/secure/Dashboard.jspa
I thought all the Incubator ID's were copied over, though.
/dev/mrg
PS. I think I kind of miss Ant, too.
On 2/23/07, Ahmed Mohombe <am...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > I think this is a result of recent Maven upgrade from 2.0.4 -> 2.0.5.
> Yes, I did the upgrade since there was mentioned everywhere that 2.0.5 fixes
> *severe* bugs (I miss ANT :) ).
>
> > Appreciate filing a bug
> OK.
>
> Is the Cayenne JIRA different from the Apache one(e.g. during the incubator)? It looks like my
> account is not recognized anymore :(.
>
> Ahmed.
>
>
Re: Building 3.0 from trunk
Posted by Ahmed Mohombe <am...@yahoo.com>.
> I think this is a result of recent Maven upgrade from 2.0.4 -> 2.0.5.
Yes, I did the upgrade since there was mentioned everywhere that 2.0.5 fixes
*severe* bugs (I miss ANT :) ).
> Appreciate filing a bug
OK.
Is the Cayenne JIRA different from the Apache one(e.g. during the incubator)? It looks like my
account is not recognized anymore :(.
Ahmed.
Re: Building 3.0 from trunk
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
> e.g. in /bin there's a 30MB CayenneModeler.jar full of junk files.
Hmm, indeed - there's lots of junk in that file. Good catch.
I think this is a result of recent Maven upgrade from 2.0.4 -> 2.0.5.
I just tried to build with 2.0.4 and got a 5MB file back. Appreciate
filing a bug - we'll probably need to do some magic with transitive
dependencies.
Andrus
Re: Building 3.0 from trunk
Posted by Ahmed Mohombe <am...@yahoo.com>.
> 3.0 (trunk) can be built with Maven for quite some time into a nice
> release assembly:
>
> http://cayenne.apache.org/building-cayenne.html
Yes, but compare the two (1.2/2.0 and 3.0):
e.g. in /bin there's a 30MB CayenneModeler.jar full of junk files.
I would like the nice distribution package 1.2/2.0 had back :) (it was so clean and pretty complete).
Thanks in advance,
Ahmed.
Building 3.0 from trunk
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
FYI:
3.0 (trunk) can be built with Maven for quite some time into a nice
release assembly:
http://cayenne.apache.org/building-cayenne.html
If integration tests are giving you hard time, skip them:
-Dmaven.test.skip=true
(at the moment they will, as a bug fix that I submitted for 'geronimo-
transaction' module hasn't made it to snapshot repo yet; also there
are bunch of dependencies on SNAPSHOT versions of third party
modules, so things can get hairy in itests)
Andrus
Re: CAY-659
Posted by Ahmed Mohombe <am...@yahoo.com>.
> If anyone is interested I can post this modified Cayenne 1.2 Modeler
> build on a web server.
Yes, please, post it.
There are just too many projects using Cayenne 1.2, and since 3.0 is not
"build-able" in a distribution (maven is not producing the same result as ANT yet),
most projects will stay with it.
Thanks in advance,
Ahmed.
P.S. Maybe we could transform this ticket into' a "bug" request :), to be able
to apply the patch on 1.2/2.0 :).
Re: CAY-659
Posted by Malcolm Edgar <ma...@gmail.com>.
Ok, well all forward on Cayenne 3.0 then.
If anyone is interested I can post this modified Cayenne 1.2 Modeler
build on a web server.
regards Malcolm Edgar
On 2/22/07, Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org> wrote:
> Hi Malcolm,
>
> I am taking this to the list.
>
> On Feb 22, 2007, at 1:32 AM, Malcolm Edgar wrote:
> > Hi Andrus,
> >
> > I have completed most of CAY-659, against the STABLE 1.2 branch.
> >
> > The only piece not done is the deferred loading of descriptions by the
> > Cayenne runtime, I have a boolean flag option in the MapLoader to
> > support this functionality. Possibly you can have a look at it to see
> > how you want it used.
> >
> > We have been using this build for a week or so now, with now issues.
> > I was thinking I could check these changes into STABLE 1.2, and once
> > you are happy with them apply these changes to STABLE 2.0.
> >
> > I can see its going to be a pain maintaining these two branches.
>
> Actually there is another reason why we can't check it in to 1.2
> branch - 1.2 is frozen stable branch and we only add bug fixes to it.
> We shouldn't be adding any new features to 1.2 (or 2.0 for that
> matter). So officially we can only maintain it on trunk.
>
> At the same time I understand you have a personal need to use it with
> 1.2? If so you can create your own branch in SVN (1.2-STABLE-CAY-659
> or something) and maintain it there. As long as for every change you
> log a patch in Jira, so that we can transfer it to trunk at some
> point (or you can actually apply it to trunk yourself).
>
> Andrus
>
>