You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to derby-dev@db.apache.org by "Daniel John Debrunner (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2006/12/13 21:45:21 UTC
[jira] Created: (DERBY-2171) Issues section of RELEASE-NOTES is
confusing
Issues section of RELEASE-NOTES is confusing
--------------------------------------------
Key: DERBY-2171
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2171
Project: Derby
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Documentation
Affects Versions: 10.2.1.6, 10.2.2.0
Reporter: Daniel John Debrunner
I find the Issues section of the RELEASE-NOTES very confusing, the summary has a bullet list of items with a number.
The descriptions for all these issues do not describe the issue, they descibe the original bug report. Thus when I read this list I don't get the impression that these are issues I should care about. However when reading the detail I do see it is an issue that I should care about.
For example:
>From bullet list.
"263 - Client should throw not implemented exception for depricated setUnicodeStream/getUnicodeStream"
Says to me there is an outstanding bug in 10.2 where the client is throwing an exception it should not.
But the actual issue that will affect an application is well described by the statement problem statement in the section for 253
"PreparedStatement.setUnicodeStream() and ResultSet.getUnicodeStream() throw SQLException when invoked after upgrading to Apache Derby 10.2."
Seems like that would be the better text to be put in the bullet list.
Looking at the detailed notes for the issues the text in Problem sometimes describes something that is a good thing, not a Problem.
E.g. 781, is it a problem Derby now performs a hash-join, if so why was it changed? (and 1357)
Some that describe a Problem (e..g. 721,1130,1295,1314,1384,1652) are actually describing a problem that no longer exists in 10.2, but I thought this section was about issues that existed in 10.2. In these cases the Symptom text tends to describe the "problem" better. Ie. the problem is that the code behaviour has changed, not the old bug.
I don't understand why these are considered issues though: 668, 1621 - they seem to be fixed bugs.
253, 1857, 822 are good examples to follow (except for the one liner in the bullet list)
Also maybe there could be some text that explains what ISSUES are. :-) Something along the lines of applications upgrading to 10.2 or using Derby for the first time should be aware of these issues.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (DERBY-2171) Issues section of RELEASE-NOTES is
confusing
Posted by "Daniel John Debrunner (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2171?page=comments#action_12458261 ]
Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-2171:
----------------------------------------------
The detailed entry for 1652 is confusing, hard to understand if the problem still exists or has been fixed.
In the Solution section just says a fix is available in 10.1 and 10.2 (so why is it in the issues section then?)
and then has a incomplete sentence "thrown now".
> Issues section of RELEASE-NOTES is confusing
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-2171
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2171
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Documentation
> Affects Versions: 10.2.1.6, 10.2.2.0
> Reporter: Daniel John Debrunner
>
> I find the Issues section of the RELEASE-NOTES very confusing, the summary has a bullet list of items with a number.
> The descriptions for all these issues do not describe the issue, they descibe the original bug report. Thus when I read this list I don't get the impression that these are issues I should care about. However when reading the detail I do see it is an issue that I should care about.
> For example:
> From bullet list.
> "263 - Client should throw not implemented exception for depricated setUnicodeStream/getUnicodeStream"
> Says to me there is an outstanding bug in 10.2 where the client is throwing an exception it should not.
> But the actual issue that will affect an application is well described by the statement problem statement in the section for 253
> "PreparedStatement.setUnicodeStream() and ResultSet.getUnicodeStream() throw SQLException when invoked after upgrading to Apache Derby 10.2."
> Seems like that would be the better text to be put in the bullet list.
> Looking at the detailed notes for the issues the text in Problem sometimes describes something that is a good thing, not a Problem.
> E.g. 781, is it a problem Derby now performs a hash-join, if so why was it changed? (and 1357)
> Some that describe a Problem (e..g. 721,1130,1295,1314,1384,1652) are actually describing a problem that no longer exists in 10.2, but I thought this section was about issues that existed in 10.2. In these cases the Symptom text tends to describe the "problem" better. Ie. the problem is that the code behaviour has changed, not the old bug.
> I don't understand why these are considered issues though: 668, 1621 - they seem to be fixed bugs.
> 253, 1857, 822 are good examples to follow (except for the one liner in the bullet list)
> Also maybe there could be some text that explains what ISSUES are. :-) Something along the lines of applications upgrading to 10.2 or using Derby for the first time should be aware of these issues.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Updated: (DERBY-2171) Issues section of RELEASE-NOTES is
confusing
Posted by "Rick Hillegas (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2171?page=all ]
Rick Hillegas updated DERBY-2171:
---------------------------------
Attachment: derby-2171-v01.diff
RELEASE-NOTES.html
Committed derby-2171-v01.diff at subversion revision 488358. This attempts to address some of the concerns raised by Dan. These changes should appear on the download page for 10.2.2 but will not appear in the 10.2.2.0 release candidate.
Changes include:
1) Prefixes added to numbered links in issues list.
2) Link descriptions and problem summaries changed to reflect customer impact rather than original bug summary.
3) Meaning of "issues" clarified: bug fixes which may require some recoding by existing applications.
> Issues section of RELEASE-NOTES is confusing
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-2171
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2171
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Documentation
> Affects Versions: 10.2.1.6, 10.2.2.0
> Reporter: Daniel John Debrunner
> Attachments: derby-2171-v01.diff, RELEASE-NOTES.html
>
>
> I find the Issues section of the RELEASE-NOTES very confusing, the summary has a bullet list of items with a number.
> The descriptions for all these issues do not describe the issue, they descibe the original bug report. Thus when I read this list I don't get the impression that these are issues I should care about. However when reading the detail I do see it is an issue that I should care about.
> For example:
> From bullet list.
> "263 - Client should throw not implemented exception for depricated setUnicodeStream/getUnicodeStream"
> Says to me there is an outstanding bug in 10.2 where the client is throwing an exception it should not.
> But the actual issue that will affect an application is well described by the statement problem statement in the section for 253
> "PreparedStatement.setUnicodeStream() and ResultSet.getUnicodeStream() throw SQLException when invoked after upgrading to Apache Derby 10.2."
> Seems like that would be the better text to be put in the bullet list.
> Looking at the detailed notes for the issues the text in Problem sometimes describes something that is a good thing, not a Problem.
> E.g. 781, is it a problem Derby now performs a hash-join, if so why was it changed? (and 1357)
> Some that describe a Problem (e..g. 721,1130,1295,1314,1384,1652) are actually describing a problem that no longer exists in 10.2, but I thought this section was about issues that existed in 10.2. In these cases the Symptom text tends to describe the "problem" better. Ie. the problem is that the code behaviour has changed, not the old bug.
> I don't understand why these are considered issues though: 668, 1621 - they seem to be fixed bugs.
> 253, 1857, 822 are good examples to follow (except for the one liner in the bullet list)
> Also maybe there could be some text that explains what ISSUES are. :-) Something along the lines of applications upgrading to 10.2 or using Derby for the first time should be aware of these issues.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (DERBY-2171) Issues section of RELEASE-NOTES is
confusing
Posted by "Daniel John Debrunner (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2171?page=comments#action_12459790 ]
Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-2171:
----------------------------------------------
The re-worked issues section looks much better - thanks Rick.
There is a minor problem with the issue description for DERBY-1384, it says
"Maximum BLOB/CLOB length has increased to 2G-1."
The maximum length for a BLOB/CLOB has always been 2G-1 (bytes/characters) for Derby.
What changed was the default maximum when no maximum was specified.
E.g.
BLOB(1G) worked in 10.0 onwards
BLOB mapped to 1M in 10.0/10.1 - maps to 2G-1 in 10.2
> Issues section of RELEASE-NOTES is confusing
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-2171
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2171
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Documentation
> Affects Versions: 10.2.1.6, 10.2.2.0
> Reporter: Daniel John Debrunner
> Attachments: derby-2171-v01.diff, RELEASE-NOTES.html
>
>
> I find the Issues section of the RELEASE-NOTES very confusing, the summary has a bullet list of items with a number.
> The descriptions for all these issues do not describe the issue, they descibe the original bug report. Thus when I read this list I don't get the impression that these are issues I should care about. However when reading the detail I do see it is an issue that I should care about.
> For example:
> From bullet list.
> "263 - Client should throw not implemented exception for depricated setUnicodeStream/getUnicodeStream"
> Says to me there is an outstanding bug in 10.2 where the client is throwing an exception it should not.
> But the actual issue that will affect an application is well described by the statement problem statement in the section for 253
> "PreparedStatement.setUnicodeStream() and ResultSet.getUnicodeStream() throw SQLException when invoked after upgrading to Apache Derby 10.2."
> Seems like that would be the better text to be put in the bullet list.
> Looking at the detailed notes for the issues the text in Problem sometimes describes something that is a good thing, not a Problem.
> E.g. 781, is it a problem Derby now performs a hash-join, if so why was it changed? (and 1357)
> Some that describe a Problem (e..g. 721,1130,1295,1314,1384,1652) are actually describing a problem that no longer exists in 10.2, but I thought this section was about issues that existed in 10.2. In these cases the Symptom text tends to describe the "problem" better. Ie. the problem is that the code behaviour has changed, not the old bug.
> I don't understand why these are considered issues though: 668, 1621 - they seem to be fixed bugs.
> 253, 1857, 822 are good examples to follow (except for the one liner in the bullet list)
> Also maybe there could be some text that explains what ISSUES are. :-) Something along the lines of applications upgrading to 10.2 or using Derby for the first time should be aware of these issues.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira