You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to jdo-dev@db.apache.org by Michael Bouschen <mi...@akquinet.de> on 2015/02/12 21:35:05 UTC
JDO TCK Conference Call Friday February 13, 9 am Pacific Time (PST)
Hi,
We will have our regular meeting Friday, February 13 at 9 am Pacific Time (PST) to discuss JDO TCK issues and status.
Dial-in numbers are:
US Toll free: 866 682-4770
Germany Frankfurt +49 69 222 216 106
Germany Munich: +49 89 1430 2323
(Other countries by request)
To place the call:
1. Call the toll free number.
2. Enter the conference number 939-3689#
3. Enter the security code 1111#
We use the conference call for audio and use Google Hangouts for screen sharing and video.
The Google Hangouts URL for the meeting: http://goo.gl/sCKJaS
Agenda:
1. JIRA "Support for conditional operator ? : in JDOQL": https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-650
2. JIRA "Modify specification to address NoSQL datastores": https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-651
3. JIRA "Allow makePersistent outside a transaction": https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-589
4. Other issues
Action Items from weeks past:
[Oct 17 2014] AI Matthew any updates for "Modify specification to address NoSQL datastores": https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-651?
[Feb 28 2014] AI Everyone: take a look at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-712
[Feb 28 2014] AI Everyone: take a look at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-625
[Dec 13 2013] AI Craig file a JIRA for java.sql.Blob and java.sql.Clob as persistent field types
[May 10 2013] AI Everyone take a look Apache ISIS and maybe subscribe to ISIS mail lists.
[Aug 24 2012] AI Craig update the JIRAs JDO-689 JDO-690 and JDO-692 about JDOHelper methods. In process.
--
*Michael Bouschen*
*Prokurist*
akquinet tech@spree GmbH
Bülowstr. 66, D-10783 Berlin
Fon: +49 30 235 520-33
Fax: +49 30 217 520-12
Email: michael.bouschen@akquinet.de
Web: www.akquinet.de <http://www.akquinet.de>
akquinet tech@spree GmbH, Berlin
Geschäftsführung: Martin Weber, Dr. Torsten Fink
Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg HRB 86780 B
USt.-Id. Nr.: DE 225 964 680
Re: Minutes: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday February 13, 10 am Pacific Time (PST)
Posted by Craig L Russell <cr...@oracle.com>.
Hi Andy,
> On Feb 20, 2015, at 9:50 AM, Andy Jefferson <an...@datanucleus.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Craig,
>
>>> Returning to that old question : When will 3.1 be released?
>>> JDO Query API rewrite is the thing people want.
>>
>> I assume you’re talking about https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-652
>> which was discussed not quite to agreement a few years ago. Are you
>> suggesting to put this feature back into 3.1?
>> I thought that the only feature we are waiting on for 3.1 is the IF ELSE.
>
> I suggested some time back on this list that 3.1 should have been released a
> long time ago (and I didn't see a release process, or what is holding it up -
> 2012 would have been the opportune time to do it FWIW), and got the answer
> that there was no release date. The only reason why "IF ELSE" was pushed into
> 3.1 was because no release was forthcoming.
>
> Why can't 3.1 just be released right now?, and then the things that users of
> JDO really see as important be tackled immediately in a JDO 4.0? The query
> rewrite is in the latter category.
Sounds good. Do we have a release manager for the release?
Craig
>
>
>
>
> --
> Andy
> DataNucleus (Web: http://www.datanucleus.org Twitter: @datanucleus)
Craig L Russell
Architect, Oracle
http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: Minutes: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday February 13, 10 am Pacific Time (PST)
Posted by Andy Jefferson <an...@datanucleus.org>.
Hi Craig,
> > Returning to that old question : When will 3.1 be released?
> > JDO Query API rewrite is the thing people want.
>
> I assume you’re talking about https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-652
> which was discussed not quite to agreement a few years ago. Are you
> suggesting to put this feature back into 3.1?
> I thought that the only feature we are waiting on for 3.1 is the IF ELSE.
I suggested some time back on this list that 3.1 should have been released a
long time ago (and I didn't see a release process, or what is holding it up -
2012 would have been the opportune time to do it FWIW), and got the answer
that there was no release date. The only reason why "IF ELSE" was pushed into
3.1 was because no release was forthcoming.
Why can't 3.1 just be released right now?, and then the things that users of
JDO really see as important be tackled immediately in a JDO 4.0? The query
rewrite is in the latter category.
--
Andy
DataNucleus (Web: http://www.datanucleus.org Twitter: @datanucleus)
Re: Minutes: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday February 13, 10 am Pacific Time (PST)
Posted by Craig L Russell <cr...@oracle.com>.
Hi Andy,
> On Feb 14, 2015, at 12:37 AM, Andy Jefferson <an...@datanucleus.org> wrote:
>
>> a. Missing exception in case of different types in multiple expressions in
>> IF and ELSE. Might not be an error; needs discussion. b. Generated CASE
>> statement is reordered randomly, leading to incorrect results.
>> Currently testing against 4.1.0-M1. What is the version of DataNucleus
>> that we should be testing against?
>
> "reordered randomly" is presumably for the test which has incompletely
> defined "when" clauses, that rely on the order of the "IF-ELSE IF-ELSE"
> clauses. I personally would *always* fully define my 'when clauses' so that if
> I wanted to swap them around at some later date then I won't find some
> implied behaviour.
This might be “best practice” but I think it’s pretty clear that IF ELSE implicitly allows non-overlapping conditions with the first condition always being evaluated first.
>
> Suggest that you use nightly builds of anything if wanting to check current
> capability (after all, I need to use non-released Apache JDO code here).
> "4.1 nightly" caters for incompletely defined when clauses IIRC.
>
>
> Returning to that old question : When will 3.1 be released?
> JDO Query API rewrite is the thing people want.
I assume you’re talking about https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-652 which was discussed not quite to agreement a few years ago. Are you suggesting to put this feature back into 3.1?
I thought that the only feature we are waiting on for 3.1 is the IF ELSE.
What do you think?
Craig
>
>
>
> --
> Andy
> DataNucleus (Web: http://www.datanucleus.org Twitter: @datanucleus)
Craig L Russell
Architect, Oracle
http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: Minutes: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday February 13, 10 am Pacific Time (PST)
Posted by Andy Jefferson <an...@datanucleus.org>.
> a. Missing exception in case of different types in multiple expressions in
> IF and ELSE. Might not be an error; needs discussion. b. Generated CASE
> statement is reordered randomly, leading to incorrect results.
> Currently testing against 4.1.0-M1. What is the version of DataNucleus
> that we should be testing against?
"reordered randomly" is presumably for the test which has incompletely
defined "when" clauses, that rely on the order of the "IF-ELSE IF-ELSE"
clauses. I personally would *always* fully define my 'when clauses' so that if
I wanted to swap them around at some later date then I won't find some
implied behaviour.
Suggest that you use nightly builds of anything if wanting to check current
capability (after all, I need to use non-released Apache JDO code here).
"4.1 nightly" caters for incompletely defined when clauses IIRC.
Returning to that old question : When will 3.1 be released?
JDO Query API rewrite is the thing people want.
--
Andy
DataNucleus (Web: http://www.datanucleus.org Twitter: @datanucleus)
Minutes: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday February 13, 10 am Pacific Time (PST)
Posted by Craig L Russell <cr...@oracle.com>.
Attendees: Michael Bouschen, Craig Russell
Agenda:
1. JIRA "Support for conditional operator ? : in JDOQL": https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-650
Latest test case was checked in, with a single error being tested for each negative test. Still two problems.
a. Missing exception in case of different types in multiple expressions in IF and ELSE. Might not be an error; needs discussion.
b. Generated CASE statement is reordered randomly, leading to incorrect results.
Currently testing against 4.1.0-M1. What is the version of DataNucleus that we should be testing against?
Some more test cases could be added. Any more assertions that need to be tested?
2. JIRA "Modify specification to address NoSQL datastores": https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-651
3. JIRA "Allow makePersistent outside a transaction": https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-589
4. Other issues
Action Items from weeks past:
[Oct 17 2014] AI Matthew any updates for "Modify specification to address NoSQL datastores": https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-651?
[Feb 28 2014] AI Everyone: take a look at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-712
[Feb 28 2014] AI Everyone: take a look at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-625
[Dec 13 2013] AI Craig file a JIRA for java.sql.Blob and java.sql.Clob as persistent field types
[May 10 2013] AI Everyone take a look Apache ISIS and maybe subscribe to ISIS mail lists.
[Aug 24 2012] AI Craig update the JIRAs JDO-689 JDO-690 and JDO-692 about JDOHelper methods. In process.
Craig L Russell
Architect, Oracle
http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@oracle.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!