Re: Any reason not to move to 3.3 final yet?

[Thomas Fischer <tf...@apache.org>]

> I am thinking that it would be a good idea to avoid a long delay between 
> 3.3-RC3 and 3.3 final.  Is there anything outstanding that needs to be worked 
> on before 3.3 final?
>

There ist the templates issue torque-107,
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TORQUE-107
but this has been around for a while and I di not think it justifies 
another version in itself, so +1 for a early 3.3 final.

I'm away on holiday now for two weeks, but I'd vote +1 on a vote to 
release 3.3RC3 as 3.3

     Thomas



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org

Re: Any reason not to move to 3.3 final yet?

[Brendan Miller <bm...@dotster.com>]

>>
>> Will there be a do-all-the-stuff-that-doesn't-justify-another-version
>> version soon?  Can we have a 3.4 plan that does some of these "leftovers"
>> without waiting another year?  I've written lots of workaround code for
>> TORQUE-107, but we maintain our own copy of Village for TORQUE-8.
>> Getting rid of these types of issues would make development with Torque
>> a lot easier.
>>
> While I commend you on raising these issues and I know you are working on 
> providing test cases for them, the basic problem here is that these issues 
> have been raised very late in the 3.3 development cycle (which for many 
> reasons we do not want to extend any further) and they have not been 
> confirmed to exist via test cases (yes, you have provided one now and are 
> working on the other) or reports from other users.

That totally makes sense.  I wasn't necessarily looking to extend the
3.3 release cycle either.  I guess I should rephrase what I said earlier
as "What are the post-3.3 plans?"  I'm not looking for my "pet" release
(okay, maybe a little), but I guess I was looking for hope that the things 
I can fix or contribute toward can make it into some subsequent release.

I have used Torque for years, but never followed development as closely
as I do now.

> I have taken the following specific actions:
> 1. TORQUE-8: I have resurrected the Village test case, added a test case 
> for this issue and the problem does not occur.  I have also noted that the 
> documentation indicates that it the ResultSet objects are automatically 
> closed.

Yes, I read of this.  We earlier thought we were experiencing the
issues described in TORQUE-8, which is why I brought it to life with
the patch that I previously provided.  We were only running with a
patched Village on a small project that was query heavy and running
out of cursors.  At this point, I'm not sure if that was the problem
or not.  I'll eventually make it back to retesting (thanks for the test
case!) and see if I can re-create in a Village-only environment, and
re-open if necessary.  I have read the ResultSet documentation as well
and noted their "auto-close" behavior, so I'm not sure from where our 
cursor problems stemmed.

> 2. TORQUE-107: I have had a fairly close look and have been unable to spot 
> a code path that will lead to this problem.  If this is indeed a problem 
> then it has been there for a long time without being reported so I think 
> users will survive until the next point release.

I have had numerous cases that will exhibit the problem in our
application code; I simply need to sit down and write something
standalone or in the framework of the Torque test project (thanks
for the link, BTW).

> 3. TORQUE-108: Now that you have supplied a test case I am reasonably 
> comfortable with this going in - the decision is not mine to make but I can 
> make it an option on the release vote (i.e. there will be a secondary vote 
> as to whether or not to include this in 3.3 final).

Like I said, it doesn't have to be in 3.3 final if the project voters
decide it shouldn't.  My only hope is that it doesn't languish for a
long time before the next release.  I basically want to minimize the
length of time I have to maintain my own patchset.

Thanks for your feedback and direction.

Brendan

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org

Re: Any reason not to move to 3.3 final yet?

[Scott Eade <se...@backstagetech.com.au>]

Brendan Miller wrote:
>> There ist the templates issue torque-107,
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TORQUE-107
>> but this has been around for a while and I di not think it justifies 
>> another version in itself, so +1 for a early 3.3 final.
>>     
>
> Will there be a do-all-the-stuff-that-doesn't-justify-another-version
> version soon?  Can we have a 3.4 plan that does some of these "leftovers"
> without waiting another year?  I've written lots of workaround code for
> TORQUE-107, but we maintain our own copy of Village for TORQUE-8.
> Getting rid of these types of issues would make development with Torque
> a lot easier.
>
> Brendan
>   
While I commend you on raising these issues and I know you are working 
on providing test cases for them, the basic problem here is that these 
issues have been raised very late in the 3.3 development cycle (which 
for many reasons we do not want to extend any further) and they have not 
been confirmed to exist via test cases (yes, you have provided one now 
and are working on the other) or reports from other users.

I have taken the following specific actions:
1. TORQUE-8: I have resurrected the Village test case, added a test case 
for this issue and the problem does not occur.  I have also noted that 
the documentation indicates that it the ResultSet objects are 
automatically closed.
2. TORQUE-107: I have had a fairly close look and have been unable to 
spot a code path that will lead to this problem.  If this is indeed a 
problem then it has been there for a long time without being reported so 
I think users will survive until the next point release.
3. TORQUE-108: Now that you have supplied a test case I am reasonably 
comfortable with this going in - the decision is not mine to make but I 
can make it an option on the release vote (i.e. there will be a 
secondary vote as to whether or not to include this in 3.3 final).

Scott

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org

Re: Any reason not to move to 3.3 final yet?

[Brendan Miller <bm...@dotster.com>]

> A patch is great (we welcome and appreciate all contributions), but a patch 
> that includes a test case that fails before the patch is applied and passes 
> after should result in the patch being applied quicker than when no test 
> case is provided.

A splendid development paradigm.  I'll see what I can do. :)

Brendan

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org

Re: Any reason not to move to 3.3 final yet?

[Scott Eade <se...@backstagetech.com.au>]

Brendan Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 03:23:59PM +1100, Scott Eade wrote:
>   
>> Brendan Miller wrote:
>>     
>>> Will there be a do-all-the-stuff-that-doesn't-justify-another-version
>>> version soon?  Can we have a 3.4 plan that does some of these "leftovers"
>>> without waiting another year?  I've written lots of workaround code for
>>> TORQUE-107, but we maintain our own copy of Village for TORQUE-8.
>>> Getting rid of these types of issues would make development with Torque
>>> a lot easier
>>>       
>> Two words: Test cases.
>>     
>
> Sure.  Specifically what do you want to see?
>   
A patch is great (we welcome and appreciate all contributions), but a 
patch that includes a test case that fails before the patch is applied 
and passes after should result in the patch being applied quicker than 
when no test case is provided.

Scott


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org

Re: Any reason not to move to 3.3 final yet?

[Brendan Miller <bm...@dotster.com>]

On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 03:23:59PM +1100, Scott Eade wrote:
> Brendan Miller wrote:
>>
>> Will there be a do-all-the-stuff-that-doesn't-justify-another-version
>> version soon?  Can we have a 3.4 plan that does some of these "leftovers"
>> without waiting another year?  I've written lots of workaround code for
>> TORQUE-107, but we maintain our own copy of Village for TORQUE-8.
>> Getting rid of these types of issues would make development with Torque
>> a lot easier
> Two words: Test cases.
>

Sure.  Specifically what do you want to see?

Brendan

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org

Re: Any reason not to move to 3.3 final yet?

[Scott Eade <se...@backstagetech.com.au>]

Brendan Miller wrote:
>> There ist the templates issue torque-107,
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TORQUE-107
>> but this has been around for a while and I di not think it justifies 
>> another version in itself, so +1 for a early 3.3 final.
>>     
>
> Will there be a do-all-the-stuff-that-doesn't-justify-another-version
> version soon?  Can we have a 3.4 plan that does some of these "leftovers"
> without waiting another year?  I've written lots of workaround code for
> TORQUE-107, but we maintain our own copy of Village for TORQUE-8.
> Getting rid of these types of issues would make development with Torque
> a lot easier
Two words: Test cases.

Scott

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org

Re: Any reason not to move to 3.3 final yet?

[Brendan Miller <bm...@dotster.com>]

>
> There ist the templates issue torque-107,
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TORQUE-107
> but this has been around for a while and I di not think it justifies 
> another version in itself, so +1 for a early 3.3 final.

Will there be a do-all-the-stuff-that-doesn't-justify-another-version
version soon?  Can we have a 3.4 plan that does some of these "leftovers"
without waiting another year?  I've written lots of workaround code for
TORQUE-107, but we maintain our own copy of Village for TORQUE-8.
Getting rid of these types of issues would make development with Torque
a lot easier.

Brendan

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org