twin issues on Jira OAK-13 and OAK-57

[Alex Parvulescu <al...@gmail.com>]

Hi gang,

I'm wondering about 2 issues that are talking about the same refactoring
task [0] and [1].

There is still a bunch of code there.
Is there any update on the oak-core 'mk' package?

As far as I'm concerned, the index code that references this package is
separated under a package named 'o.a.j.oak.plugins.index.old' and is not in
use by oak-core.

thanks,
alex


[0] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-13
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-57

Re: twin issues on Jira OAK-13 and OAK-57

[Thomas Mueller <mu...@adobe.com>]

Hi,

Yes, it can be removed as soon as the b-tree stuff is migrated - but not
before that :-)

Regards,
Thomas


On 10/25/12 12:00 PM, "Jukka Zitting" <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:

>402075 I moved the o.a.j.mk packages in oak-core
>to under o.a.j.oak.plugins.index.old.mk. We can remove the code once
>we've migrated all the remaining functionality (like the b-tree stuff)
>to work with the NodeState model.

Re: twin issues on Jira OAK-13 and OAK-57

[Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Alex Parvulescu
<al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm wondering about 2 issues that are talking about the same refactoring
> task [0] and [1].

I resolved OAK-57 as a duplicate of OAK-13.

> There is still a bunch of code there.
> Is there any update on the oak-core 'mk' package?
>
> As far as I'm concerned, the index code that references this package is
> separated under a package named 'o.a.j.oak.plugins.index.old' and is not in
> use by oak-core.

Right. In revision 1402075 I moved the o.a.j.mk packages in oak-core
to under o.a.j.oak.plugins.index.old.mk. We can remove the code once
we've migrated all the remaining functionality (like the b-tree stuff)
to work with the NodeState model.

BR,

Jukka Zitting

Re: twin issues on Jira OAK-13 and OAK-57

[Michael Dürig <md...@apache.org>]

On 24.10.12 17:13, Alex Parvulescu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by "used for testing".
> It has some unit tests, but other than that, it has no central role in
> testing, removing it doesn't cause a disturbance in the force.

+1 for removing it.

Michael

>
> best,
> alex
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Thomas Mueller <mu...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Isn't the property index (o.a.j.oak.plugins.index.old) still used for
>> testing?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Thomas
>>
>> On 10/24/12 3:05 PM, "Alex Parvulescu" <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi gang,
>>>
>>> I'm wondering about 2 issues that are talking about the same refactoring
>>> task [0] and [1].
>>>
>>> There is still a bunch of code there.
>>> Is there any update on the oak-core 'mk' package?
>>>
>>> As far as I'm concerned, the index code that references this package is
>>> separated under a package named 'o.a.j.oak.plugins.index.old' and is not
>>> in
>>> use by oak-core.
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>> alex
>>>
>>>
>>> [0] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-13
>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-57
>>
>>
>

Re: twin issues on Jira OAK-13 and OAK-57

[Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 6:13 PM, Alex Parvulescu
<al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure what you mean by "used for testing".
> It has some unit tests, but other than that, it has no central role in
> testing, removing it doesn't cause a disturbance in the force.

Except hundreds lines of code crying out in terror and being suddenly
removed. It'll be like something terrible happening. ;-)

BR,

Jukka Zitting

Re: twin issues on Jira OAK-13 and OAK-57

[Thomas Mueller <mu...@adobe.com>]

Hi,

>I'm not sure what you mean by "used for testing".

I mean used for manual testing. I'm planning to use it for some manual
testing, and I thought others use it as well or plan to use it. I also
want to run some benchmarks to find out if a Lucene index or the property
index is faster.

>It has some unit tests

I wan't talking about that is has unit tests.

>removing it doesn't cause a disturbance in the force.

If even a butterfly can cause a hurricane [1], think about what removing
this code could result in :-)

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_effect

Regards,
Thomas

Re: twin issues on Jira OAK-13 and OAK-57

[Alex Parvulescu <al...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

I'm not sure what you mean by "used for testing".
It has some unit tests, but other than that, it has no central role in
testing, removing it doesn't cause a disturbance in the force.

best,
alex


On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Thomas Mueller <mu...@adobe.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Isn't the property index (o.a.j.oak.plugins.index.old) still used for
> testing?
>
> Regards,
> Thomas
>
> On 10/24/12 3:05 PM, "Alex Parvulescu" <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Hi gang,
> >
> >I'm wondering about 2 issues that are talking about the same refactoring
> >task [0] and [1].
> >
> >There is still a bunch of code there.
> >Is there any update on the oak-core 'mk' package?
> >
> >As far as I'm concerned, the index code that references this package is
> >separated under a package named 'o.a.j.oak.plugins.index.old' and is not
> >in
> >use by oak-core.
> >
> >thanks,
> >alex
> >
> >
> >[0] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-13
> >[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-57
>
>

Re: twin issues on Jira OAK-13 and OAK-57

[Thomas Mueller <mu...@adobe.com>]

Hi,

Isn't the property index (o.a.j.oak.plugins.index.old) still used for
testing?

Regards,
Thomas

On 10/24/12 3:05 PM, "Alex Parvulescu" <al...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Hi gang,
>
>I'm wondering about 2 issues that are talking about the same refactoring
>task [0] and [1].
>
>There is still a bunch of code there.
>Is there any update on the oak-core 'mk' package?
>
>As far as I'm concerned, the index code that references this package is
>separated under a package named 'o.a.j.oak.plugins.index.old' and is not
>in
>use by oak-core.
>
>thanks,
>alex
>
>
>[0] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-13
>[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-57