On 3/25/2011 12:14 PM, siddharth srivastava wrote:
Hi
I am applying for Derby Test and Fix project during GSoC this year.
I have shortlisted the following issues for GSoC 2011:
I would like to have the view of the community on these issues and the
tentative time line, before I post a detailed proposal.
1) Derby 5014: Tests should restore the timeout values to default
after they are done running.
Timeline: May 24- 7th June 2011 (15 days)
2) Derby-4795: Starting network server with -ssl turns SSL off
Timeline: 8th April - 15th June 2011 ( 8 days)
3) Derby- 4779: NPE while inserting into a table which has a generated
column and an insert trigger
Timeline: : 16th April-30 June 2011 (15 days)
4) Derby-4249:Create a simple store recovery test in JUnit
Timeline: 1 July-23 July (23 days)
5) DERBY-3676 : Make the toString() method of Derby PreparedStatements
print out SQL text with ? parameters replaced by the values that have
been set so far
Timeline: 24th July- 7th August (14 days)
6) Store test conversion: updatelocks.sql (doesn't not have dedicated
Jira issue yet)
Timeline: 8th August - 14th August ( 7 days)
Siddharth I think this looks good except instead of updatelocks.sql I
would prefer to see you convert one of the recovery tests to show that
your simple recovery test is a good model. Also if you look at
updatelocks.sql you
will see it runs quite a few subsql files and also I think is run in
various modes so might be just very large and time consuming and not
suitable for a seven day project. I would suggest converting
oc_rec[1-4].java tests which I think are set up to run consecutively to
get the desired recovery behavior. It would be good to look at these
in your planning for DERBY-4249 and shave 4 days off the DERBY-4249 and
add it to the conversion.
I think you propose a very achievable schedule and I admire that and
think you should call out in your final proposal that you have made an
effort to plan realistically. Make sure you include technical aspects
and challenges for each issue, for example for DERBY-3676, the technical
changes might not be that complex but I am guessing there will be a fair
amount of community discussion around the issue as there has been already.
Thanks
Kathey
