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 2007/06/22 15:23:49 UTC
How about 3.0 M1?
What's the consensus on making 3.0 M1 release?
I think it is long overdue - we want to show the many things we've
developed over the last 1+ year [1]. Also I just checked in the
minimal EJBQL support so that users can play with it (that was my own
minimal TODO). As before "M" (milestone) means an alpha quality
release with unstable new features, "unstable" indicating that the
new API can change over the course of the release.
If nobody objects to going forward with M1, I will switch in the
release preparation mode, testing the code across different
databases, writing the docs, etc.
Andrus
[1] http://cayenne.apache.org/doc/guide-to-30-features.html
Re: How about 3.0 M1?
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
My next step would be updating the docs on Wiki and brining the
updates to SVN.
Any volunteers to run the RAT tool [1] against the trunk and filter
out bogus failures?
Thanks
Andrus
[1] http://cayenne.apache.org/release-guide.html
On Jul 1, 2007, at 5:03 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> I am done with cross-DB testing of the trunk code. I tested Cayenne
> with the following databases, and the current test suite fully
> passes against all of them:
>
> * Derby
> * FrontBase
> * HSQLDB
> * MySQL
> * OpenBase
> * PostgreSQL
> * Sybase
> * SQLServer
>
> I discovered a bunch of issues and fixed most of them. Those that
> didn't have an immediate fix, where documented on Jira and the
> corresponding test cases were temporarily removed from the test
> suite, or bypassed using the AccessStackAdapter mechanism. Here is
> the listing:
>
> CAY-811: all db's that support identity columns (MySQL, Derby,
> SQLServer)
> CAY-820: OpenBase
> CAY-821: FrontBase
>
> Still can't test against Oracle. I will set up a local Oracle
> instance someday, but likely after M1.
>
> A pleasant surprise was that Maven 2.0.6 caused no surprises so
> far. Maybe Maven 2 finally stabilized?? So I'd encourage others to
> try running the unit tests in their environment and report back.
> I've been updating the following Developer Guide page with test
> instructions that worked for me. I hope this will help (note that
> connection.properties file is mostly compatible with previous
> releases, except that the key names are required to match the POM
> profile names):
>
> http://cayenne.apache.org/running-unit-tests.html
>
> Andrus
>
>
>
Re: How about 3.0 M1?
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
I am done with cross-DB testing of the trunk code. I tested Cayenne
with the following databases, and the current test suite fully passes
against all of them:
* Derby
* FrontBase
* HSQLDB
* MySQL
* OpenBase
* PostgreSQL
* Sybase
* SQLServer
I discovered a bunch of issues and fixed most of them. Those that
didn't have an immediate fix, where documented on Jira and the
corresponding test cases were temporarily removed from the test
suite, or bypassed using the AccessStackAdapter mechanism. Here is
the listing:
CAY-811: all db's that support identity columns (MySQL, Derby,
SQLServer)
CAY-820: OpenBase
CAY-821: FrontBase
Still can't test against Oracle. I will set up a local Oracle
instance someday, but likely after M1.
A pleasant surprise was that Maven 2.0.6 caused no surprises so far.
Maybe Maven 2 finally stabilized?? So I'd encourage others to try
running the unit tests in their environment and report back. I've
been updating the following Developer Guide page with test
instructions that worked for me. I hope this will help (note that
connection.properties file is mostly compatible with previous
releases, except that the key names are required to match the POM
profile names):
http://cayenne.apache.org/running-unit-tests.html
Andrus
Re: How about 3.0 M1?
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
Testing progress update...
Since 3.0 has only been tested with HSQLDB till now, trying other
databases uncovered a few issues. I fixed all that I found so far
except for CAY-811 that affects MySQL (in fact this issue exists in
1.2 and 2.0, we just never had a test case for it). I have 100% test
success rate with HSQLDB and PostgreSQL, and the single failure above
with MySQL. Will try other DB's shortly.
I also documented the Maven unit test procedure here:
http://cayenne.apache.org/running-unit-tests.html
Feel free to try it out. Will add more DB profiles shortly.
Andrus
On Jun 22, 2007, at 4:23 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> What's the consensus on making 3.0 M1 release?
>
> I think it is long overdue - we want to show the many things we've
> developed over the last 1+ year [1]. Also I just checked in the
> minimal EJBQL support so that users can play with it (that was my
> own minimal TODO). As before "M" (milestone) means an alpha quality
> release with unstable new features, "unstable" indicating that the
> new API can change over the course of the release.
>
> If nobody objects to going forward with M1, I will switch in the
> release preparation mode, testing the code across different
> databases, writing the docs, etc.
>
> Andrus
>
>
> [1] http://cayenne.apache.org/doc/guide-to-30-features.html
>
Re: ToMany Maps [Was: How about 3.0 M1?]
Posted by Robert Zeigler <ro...@puregumption.com>.
Nice. I'll have to check it out when I get a chance (early September?).
Robert
On Aug 22, 2007, at 8/222:47 AM , Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> BTW, I just checked in the code that supports Map relationships
> (and Set relationships, although this is not that exciting) per
> CAY-848:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/cayenne/browse/CAY-848
>
> Mapping that via the Modeler and runtime execution works. There are
> still a few loose ends, most notably updating the relationship map
> after commit to remap the objects whose map key property has changed.
>
> Andrus
>
>
> On Jun 23, 2007, at 12:08 AM, Robert Zeigler wrote:
>
>> Does the "JPA-inspiried classic features" include expanded mapping
>> of relationships? In particular, does it currently include the
>> notion of mapping a to-many relationship as a map, instead of a
>> list? :)
>>
>> Robert
>>
>> On Jun 22, 2007, at 6/224:01 PM , Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 22, 2007, at 6:08 PM, Michael Gentry wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm not really opposed, but I haven't looked much at the JPA stuff.
>>>
>>> This release is definitely alpha. While one can do real
>>> persistence with Cayenne JPA already, we do not claim any kind of
>>> completeness. Still good to have new JPA-inspired classic
>>> features out there (such as lifecycle callbacks), as we'll get
>>> user feedback and better chance of finding the bugs early.
>>>
>>>> However, do we still have an unresolved issue with the password
>>>> encoding? I
>>>> tried to subscribe to the Apache Legal mailing list several
>>>> times and never
>>>> got added, so I could never take the question over there.
>>>
>>> Hmm... not sure whom we ping to get this resolved... One thing to
>>> check - have you used your apache.org email? This may speed up
>>> subscription moderation.
>>>
>>>> PS. I'd advertise the new JPA/etc stuff as alpha-quality, but
>>>> emphasis the
>>>> Cayenne Classic stuff is stable.
>>>
>>> Yep, that's the plan.
>>>
>>> Andrus
>>>
>>
>>
>
ToMany Maps [Was: How about 3.0 M1?]
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
BTW, I just checked in the code that supports Map relationships (and
Set relationships, although this is not that exciting) per CAY-848:
https://issues.apache.org/cayenne/browse/CAY-848
Mapping that via the Modeler and runtime execution works. There are
still a few loose ends, most notably updating the relationship map
after commit to remap the objects whose map key property has changed.
Andrus
On Jun 23, 2007, at 12:08 AM, Robert Zeigler wrote:
> Does the "JPA-inspiried classic features" include expanded mapping
> of relationships? In particular, does it currently include the
> notion of mapping a to-many relationship as a map, instead of a
> list? :)
>
> Robert
>
> On Jun 22, 2007, at 6/224:01 PM , Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jun 22, 2007, at 6:08 PM, Michael Gentry wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not really opposed, but I haven't looked much at the JPA stuff.
>>
>> This release is definitely alpha. While one can do real
>> persistence with Cayenne JPA already, we do not claim any kind of
>> completeness. Still good to have new JPA-inspired classic features
>> out there (such as lifecycle callbacks), as we'll get user
>> feedback and better chance of finding the bugs early.
>>
>>> However, do we still have an unresolved issue with the password
>>> encoding? I
>>> tried to subscribe to the Apache Legal mailing list several times
>>> and never
>>> got added, so I could never take the question over there.
>>
>> Hmm... not sure whom we ping to get this resolved... One thing to
>> check - have you used your apache.org email? This may speed up
>> subscription moderation.
>>
>>> PS. I'd advertise the new JPA/etc stuff as alpha-quality, but
>>> emphasis the
>>> Cayenne Classic stuff is stable.
>>
>> Yep, that's the plan.
>>
>> Andrus
>>
>
>
Re: How about 3.0 M1?
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
Not yet.
On Jun 23, 2007, at 12:08 AM, Robert Zeigler wrote:
> Does the "JPA-inspiried classic features" include expanded mapping
> of relationships? In particular, does it currently include the
> notion of mapping a to-many relationship as a map, instead of a
> list? :)
>
> Robert
>
> On Jun 22, 2007, at 6/224:01 PM , Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jun 22, 2007, at 6:08 PM, Michael Gentry wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not really opposed, but I haven't looked much at the JPA stuff.
>>
>> This release is definitely alpha. While one can do real
>> persistence with Cayenne JPA already, we do not claim any kind of
>> completeness. Still good to have new JPA-inspired classic features
>> out there (such as lifecycle callbacks), as we'll get user
>> feedback and better chance of finding the bugs early.
>>
>>> However, do we still have an unresolved issue with the password
>>> encoding? I
>>> tried to subscribe to the Apache Legal mailing list several times
>>> and never
>>> got added, so I could never take the question over there.
>>
>> Hmm... not sure whom we ping to get this resolved... One thing to
>> check - have you used your apache.org email? This may speed up
>> subscription moderation.
>>
>>> PS. I'd advertise the new JPA/etc stuff as alpha-quality, but
>>> emphasis the
>>> Cayenne Classic stuff is stable.
>>
>> Yep, that's the plan.
>>
>> Andrus
>>
>
>
Re: How about 3.0 M1?
Posted by Robert Zeigler <ro...@puregumption.com>.
Does the "JPA-inspiried classic features" include expanded mapping of
relationships? In particular, does it currently include the notion of
mapping a to-many relationship as a map, instead of a list? :)
Robert
On Jun 22, 2007, at 6/224:01 PM , Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>
> On Jun 22, 2007, at 6:08 PM, Michael Gentry wrote:
>
>> I'm not really opposed, but I haven't looked much at the JPA stuff.
>
> This release is definitely alpha. While one can do real persistence
> with Cayenne JPA already, we do not claim any kind of completeness.
> Still good to have new JPA-inspired classic features out there
> (such as lifecycle callbacks), as we'll get user feedback and
> better chance of finding the bugs early.
>
>> However, do we still have an unresolved issue with the password
>> encoding? I
>> tried to subscribe to the Apache Legal mailing list several times
>> and never
>> got added, so I could never take the question over there.
>
> Hmm... not sure whom we ping to get this resolved... One thing to
> check - have you used your apache.org email? This may speed up
> subscription moderation.
>
>> PS. I'd advertise the new JPA/etc stuff as alpha-quality, but
>> emphasis the
>> Cayenne Classic stuff is stable.
>
> Yep, that's the plan.
>
> Andrus
>
Re: How about 3.0 M1?
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
On Jun 22, 2007, at 6:08 PM, Michael Gentry wrote:
> I'm not really opposed, but I haven't looked much at the JPA stuff.
This release is definitely alpha. While one can do real persistence
with Cayenne JPA already, we do not claim any kind of completeness.
Still good to have new JPA-inspired classic features out there (such
as lifecycle callbacks), as we'll get user feedback and better chance
of finding the bugs early.
> However, do we still have an unresolved issue with the password
> encoding? I
> tried to subscribe to the Apache Legal mailing list several times
> and never
> got added, so I could never take the question over there.
Hmm... not sure whom we ping to get this resolved... One thing to
check - have you used your apache.org email? This may speed up
subscription moderation.
> PS. I'd advertise the new JPA/etc stuff as alpha-quality, but
> emphasis the
> Cayenne Classic stuff is stable.
Yep, that's the plan.
Andrus
Re: How about 3.0 M1?
Posted by Michael Gentry <bl...@gmail.com>.
I'm not really opposed, but I haven't looked much at the JPA stuff.
However, do we still have an unresolved issue with the password encoding? I
tried to subscribe to the Apache Legal mailing list several times and never
got added, so I could never take the question over there.
Thanks,
/dev/mrg
PS. I'd advertise the new JPA/etc stuff as alpha-quality, but emphasis the
Cayenne Classic stuff is stable.
On 6/22/07, Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org> wrote:
>
> What's the consensus on making 3.0 M1 release?
>
> I think it is long overdue - we want to show the many things we've
> developed over the last 1+ year [1]. Also I just checked in the
> minimal EJBQL support so that users can play with it (that was my own
> minimal TODO). As before "M" (milestone) means an alpha quality
> release with unstable new features, "unstable" indicating that the
> new API can change over the course of the release.
>
> If nobody objects to going forward with M1, I will switch in the
> release preparation mode, testing the code across different
> databases, writing the docs, etc.
>
> Andrus
>
>
> [1] http://cayenne.apache.org/doc/guide-to-30-features.html
>
Re: How about 3.0 M1?
Posted by Tore Halset <ha...@pvv.ntnu.no>.
On Jun 22, 2007, at 15:23, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> What's the consensus on making 3.0 M1 release?
It will be good to have a M1 release making it easier for people to
start testing the new features.
- Tore.
Re: How about 3.0 M1?
Posted by Aristedes Maniatis <ar...@maniatis.org>.
On 22/06/2007, at 11:23 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> What's the consensus on making 3.0 M1 release?
As some of you know we've been using 3.0 in production since late
last year. We have no reliability problems at all and we've been
giving it a good workout. Derby and mySQL only, but running it on 1.4
and 1.5 on OSX, Windows, Linux and FreeBSD. We know that it works at
a basic level on Solaris.
My concern has long been that full JPA compliance is such a big goal,
that 3.0 might be some time off. So either we reduce the goals for
3.0 or keep releasing snapshots people could use in production.
Lachlan and I will try to make time to work on inheritance (now that
the requirements are clear thanks to everyone on this list) once we
get some other important work out of the way, but I'm thinking that
that will take some time to fully implement and test.
Also, we need to be clearer about terminology:
http://cayenne.apache.org/2007/03/08/version-30-milestones-and-
javadoc.html
That indicates that the snapshots already released are 'milestones'.
Will it be clear that cayenne-client-3.0-M1.jar is superior to
cayenne-client-3.0-20070227.124237-1.jar? Or should the naming just
continue on as date stamps?
Ari Maniatis
-------------------------->
Aristedes Maniatis
phone +61 2 9660 9700
PGP fingerprint 08 57 20 4B 80 69 59 E2 A9 BF 2D 48 C2 20 0C C8
Re: How about 3.0 M1?
Posted by Andrus Adamchik <an...@objectstyle.org>.
Cool.
I am very much into "release often release early" philosophy, and I'd
like to start following it with 3.0 on both counts.
BTW, I just fixed a few remaining EJBQL join bugs that I found, so
now I will fully concentrate on cross-DB testing and the docs.
Andrus
On Jun 25, 2007, at 7:41 PM, Kevin Menard wrote:
> I'm for it. I've been out of the 3.0 game for a little bit, but it
> seemed pretty stable the last time I tried it. It'd be helpful to get
> other people using it, too. Early adopters can provide plenty of JIRA
> goodness.
>
> --
> Kevin
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Andrus Adamchik [mailto:andrus@objectstyle.org]
>> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 9:24 AM
>> To: dev@cayenne.apache.org
>> Subject: How about 3.0 M1?
>>
>> What's the consensus on making 3.0 M1 release?
>>
>> I think it is long overdue - we want to show the many things
>> we've developed over the last 1+ year [1]. Also I just
>> checked in the minimal EJBQL support so that users can play
>> with it (that was my own minimal TODO). As before "M"
>> (milestone) means an alpha quality release with unstable new
>> features, "unstable" indicating that the new API can change
>> over the course of the release.
>>
>> If nobody objects to going forward with M1, I will switch in
>> the release preparation mode, testing the code across
>> different databases, writing the docs, etc.
>>
>> Andrus
>>
>>
>> [1] http://cayenne.apache.org/doc/guide-to-30-features.html
>>
>
RE: How about 3.0 M1?
Posted by Kevin Menard <km...@servprise.com>.
I'm for it. I've been out of the 3.0 game for a little bit, but it
seemed pretty stable the last time I tried it. It'd be helpful to get
other people using it, too. Early adopters can provide plenty of JIRA
goodness.
--
Kevin
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrus Adamchik [mailto:andrus@objectstyle.org]
> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 9:24 AM
> To: dev@cayenne.apache.org
> Subject: How about 3.0 M1?
>
> What's the consensus on making 3.0 M1 release?
>
> I think it is long overdue - we want to show the many things
> we've developed over the last 1+ year [1]. Also I just
> checked in the minimal EJBQL support so that users can play
> with it (that was my own minimal TODO). As before "M"
> (milestone) means an alpha quality release with unstable new
> features, "unstable" indicating that the new API can change
> over the course of the release.
>
> If nobody objects to going forward with M1, I will switch in
> the release preparation mode, testing the code across
> different databases, writing the docs, etc.
>
> Andrus
>
>
> [1] http://cayenne.apache.org/doc/guide-to-30-features.html
>