On 4 mai 2012, at 13:18, Alex Karasulu wrote:

> 
> 
> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny <[email protected]> wrote:
> Le 5/4/12 12:20 PM, Alex Karasulu a écrit :
> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny<[email protected]>wrote:
> 
> Le 5/4/12 12:02 PM, Alex Karasulu a écrit :
> 
>  On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny<[email protected]>**
> 
> wrote:
> 
>  Hi guys,
> now that trunks is stable and fast, I try to spend some time to fix the
> @Ignored Triggers/SP tests.
> 
> As we moved away from JNDI, it impacted the associated code, and it was
> never fixed. I think it's about time...
> 
> 
>  For now I advise ignoring the SP and Trigger code fixes. First because
> the
> MVCC code and transaction subsystem will impact the implementation and we
> need to rethink the implementation. After the transaction branch and the
> OSGi branch are merged in to trunk I think it's a good time to consider
> these features again.
> 
> Really, atm, it's just about getting JNDI out of the code.
> 
> Well if it's just a matter of getting the tests running yeah it's not a big
> deal.
> 
> In terms of the big picture I think all this code needs to be
> reimplemented. The trigger and SP specifications need to be better defined.
> Handling chain recursion issues needs to be reconsidered because we've
> removed the InvocationStack I think or it's not being leveraged. Everything
> should be gutted IMHO.
> I can't agree more. And you haven't mentionned the AdministrativeModel we 
> have to get fixed...
> 
> 
> Right sorry I overlooked that. So this is something we should do all over 
> from scratch. I think we're all in agreement here.
>  
> 
> 
> The idea is to have something that works *before* we get the txn code
> merged, because then we will have a base to start with.
> 
> Those tests has been @Ignored since 2008 :/
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah that's why I don't think it's worth the time to deal with it. We
> should just focus on the TxN and OSGi side then reimplement it together.
> There is little I can do regarding those thwo things. My idea was to cut a 
> release today or tomorrow, in order to have a stable base for the next 
> iteration.
> 
> 
> Right let's get a release out with all these new advances and have our users 
> enjoy them. Meanwhile we can focus on these other efforts and work towards 
> getting out subsequent releases with them included.

+1

Regards,
Pierre-Arnaud

> -- 
> Best Regards,
> -- Alex
> 

Reply via email to