yep, call a vote on it summarizing your changes and what it all accomplishes
jesse On 1/19/07, Rahul Thakur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am done with my changes on 'id-refactor' branch. The tests run fine without any errors. It would be great if others can take this for a spin as well. How does this gets merged back to trunk now? vote? Cheers, Rahul ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jesse McConnell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <continuum-dev@maven.apache.org> Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2007 5:11 AM Subject: Re: short term branch for project/group keys > sounds good :) > > On 1/18/07, Rahul Thakur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hey Jesse, >> >> I am gonna fork a new branch tonight and get started on this change. >> Hopefully should be able to get the relevant stuff that we have >> already >> done merged on the core modules before we start playing with the >> other >> modules tomorrow :-) >> >> Cheers, >> >> Rahul >> >> >> Jesse McConnell wrote: >> > I am loathe to let a branch lay around for a long time with minimal >> > work being done actively on it and we learned what we wanted to >> > from >> > it in the short time we worked with it I think. >> > >> > my take-away was that the change the string based keys will be a >> > good >> > change but its large enough that it should be done in the context >> > of >> > some other refactoring and changes. >> > >> > as for the int->long id change, I think its a good thing and will >> > focus us to address the database upgrading issue so its all good >> > imo >> > :) >> > >> > jesse >> > >> > On 1/16/07, Rahul Thakur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> >> Jesse and myself had a chat yesterday morning about the >> >> key-refactoring >> >> branch that we spun before Christmas last year, and we reckon that >> >> it >> >> might be an idea to get 1.1-alpha rolling and meantime gather more >> >> thoughts around Groupings (introduce versions/tags). We think >> >> having >> >> String-based keys for groups might be more feasible for v1.2. >> >> >> >> However, we are keen to bring over the API changes where the 'int' >> >> Ids >> >> are now converted to 'long'. Some other bits like breaking up the >> >> existing Project and ProjectGroup interfaces can be continued on >> >> the >> >> trunk itself after the merge. >> >> >> >> What do others think? >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Rahul >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> From: "Jesse McConnell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> To: <continuum-dev@maven.apache.org> >> >> Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 8:30 AM >> >> Subject: short term branch for project/group keys >> >> >> >> >> >> >I am thinking about pulling a short term branch of continuum with >> >> > rahul and working on getting everything converted to using a >> >> > string >> >> > based key project and project group reference in all apis and in >> >> > all >> >> > of the UI decision making items. He has tomorrow off so I think >> >> > that >> >> > unless anyone has any big issues with it we'll try and make that >> >> > branch and work on it tomorrow. >> >> > >> >> > the end result of it would be: >> >> > >> >> > * int id's for project and project group in the model are for >> >> > internal >> >> > store usage >> >> > * name's for project and project group are for presentation >> >> > purposes >> >> > only >> >> > * key's are for all api usage and passing around un URL's etc. >> >> > >> >> > some quick benefits are: >> >> > >> >> > * consistency across all apis and url manipulations >> >> > * ability to add quick url rewriting for direct linking of >> >> > projects >> >> > foo.org/Doxia/Core >> >> > * common keys across running continuum instances for clustering >> >> > >> >> > jesse >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > jesse mcconnell >> >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > > > -- > jesse mcconnell > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- jesse mcconnell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
