Hi Marvin! As always: we are happy to get any feedback on how to improve those tests. Please note that this is a PERFECT opportunity to get actively involed in the DeltaSpike community as well.
I know that there is some sentiment in big companies when it comes to contributing to OSS projects. But what those managers do NOT see is that there are _huge_ benefits by doing so: * The problems get fixed exactly where they appear - and you don’t need any weird workaround in your own code (which is very ugly, makes your code much harder to maintain and is potentially broken with later releases) * If you got a problem then you can easily make sure it gets fixed. Try that with any closed source project ;) Serious, I sometimes did wait up to 1 year for important bug fixes in non-OSS projects. * You get to know the people. So if you really have any troubles then I bet you will get a solution and feedback almost imediately. Please check out the code and maybe you and your team can give us feedback in which area we lack tests. Or even provide own tests as well? This is the first step to becoming a committer yourself ;) txs and LieGrue, strub > Am 08.12.2015 um 12:47 schrieb Marvin Toll <[email protected]>: > > At Ford, we have continued to be impacted (as well) by "issues" with the DM. > In recent weeks, we came to the independent conclusion that the DM test suite > is probably inadequate. > > We are also interested in performance --- not that we have any basis for a > concern. Rather, just wondering if the additional DM layer has an impact on > "native" (for us EclipseLink) performance/scalability - and whether the DM > test suite includes a performance check for releases? > > _Marvin > > -----Original Message----- > From: Harald Wellmann [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, December 7, 2015 5:35 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache DeltaSpike 1.5.2 > > -1. > > This release breaks one of my applications (again) with an exception in > DeltaSpike Data. > > I'll get back with a JIRA ticket once I've identified the cause, which will > probably be too late for this vote. > > The release will go ahead anyway, and I don't really object to that, if > people are waiting for improvements in other areas, but this feels like a > déjà vu. > > In fact, each of the previous releases broke my applications in one way or > another, so I think the bottom line is this: There have been too many subtle > incompatible changes going on in DeltaSpike Data that in theory should never > happen with a patch release, and apparently there's too little test coverage > or too much happy path testing, or else these incompatibilities would have > been noticed sooner. > > Looks like we should spend some more time on Data tests before working on > bugs or new features. > > Regards, > Harald > > > Am 06.12.2015 um 20:54 schrieb Gerhard Petracek: >> Hi, >> >> I was running the needed tasks to get the 21th release of Apache >> DeltaSpike out. >> The artifacts are deployed to Nexus [1] (and [2]). >> >> The tag is available at [3] and the release-branch at [4]. >> They will get pushed to the ASF repository once the vote passed. >> >> Please take a look at the 1.5.2 artifacts and vote! >> >> Please note: >> This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of three +1 votes (see [5]). >> >> ------------------------------------------------ >> [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits [ ] +0 [ ] -1 >> for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be released, and >> why.............. >> ------------------------------------------------ >> >> Thanks, >> Gerhard >> >> [1] >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachedeltaspike >> -1031/ >> [2] >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachedeltaspike >> -1031/org/apache/deltaspike/deltaspike/1.5.2/deltaspike-1.5.2-source-r >> elease.zip [3] >> https://github.com/os890/deltaspike-vote/tree/deltaspike-1.5.2 >> [4] https://github.com/os890/deltaspike-vote/tree/ds-1.5.2 >> [5] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes >> > >
