Hi Stephen, working on that now, thanks for pinging me on this. On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 4:48 PM Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Jonathan, just wondering if you still plan to look at offering PRs for: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-998 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-997 > > I'll stay away from those, if you think you will be working on them. > > > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Using VertexProperyFeatures.FEATURE_{ADD, REMOVE}_PROPERTY perhaps > > would be more consistent with the logic used everywhere else... > > > > yeah - i'm +1 for this approach. it makes more sense given ADD/REMOVE > > already being the pattern for graph Element instances. > > > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Jonathan Ellithorpe < > j...@cs.stanford.edu> > > wrote: > > > >> I think it's either that or change FEATURE_META_PROPERTY to a symmetric > >> VertexFeatures.FEATURE_{ADD, REMOVE}_METAPROPERTY to pair with > >> VertexFeatures.FEATURE_{ADD, REMOVE}_PROPERTY. > >> > >> Using VertexProperyFeatures.FEATURE_{ADD, REMOVE}_PROPERTY perhaps would > >> be > >> more consistent with the logic used everywhere else... > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 6:30 AM Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > ugh - mess. maybe we should just keep the add/remove symmetry and > >> > deprecate FEATURE_META_PROPERTY then. > >> > > >> > > >> > On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Jonathan Ellithorpe < > >> j...@cs.stanford.edu> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > 1) Yes, I can submit a PR for fixing the SIMPLE feature requirement > >> set. > >> > > 2) I also agree with deprecating > >> > > VertexPropertyFeatures.FEATURE_ADD_PROPERTY, but looking at the > code I > >> > > think I realized there is a slight complication here. That is, what > >> to do > >> > > with VertexPropertyFeatures.FEATURE_REMOVE_PROPERTY. Does > >> > > VertexFeatures.FEATURE_META_PROPERTIES imply both ADD and REMOVE, or > >> only > >> > > ADD? In the later case, we would need to leave > >> > > VertexPropertyFeatures.FEATURE_REMOVE_PROPERTIES. Personally, seeing > >> as > >> > how > >> > > VertexFeatures, extending ElementFeatures, has a > FEATURE_ADD_PROPERTY > >> and > >> > > FEATURE_REMOVE_PROPERTY, that the FEATURE_META_PROPERTIES be changed > >> to > >> > > FEATURE_ADD_METAPROPERTY and FEATURE_REMOVE_METAPROPERTY. > >> > > > >> > > Jonathan > >> > > > >> > > On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 4:55 AM Stephen Mallette < > >> spmalle...@gmail.com> > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > ...damn - hot key sent my post too soon - trying again: > >> > > > > >> > > > Hi Jonathan, thanks for bringing this up. It would be nice if we > >> could > >> > > > expand coverage of our test suite by simply improving the way in > >> which > >> > > > features are applied. I was about to suggest a big set of changes > >> > when I > >> > > > realized that FeatureRequirementSet.SIMPLE is just defined wrong. > >> It > >> > > > shouldn't have this entry: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > addFeatureRequirement.Factory.create(Graph.Features.VertexPropertyFeatures.FEATURE_ADD_PROPERTY, > >> > > > Graph.Features.VertexPropertyFeatures.class)); > >> > > > > >> > > > it should just be: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > add(FeatureRequirement.Factory.create(Graph.Features.VertexFeatures.FEATURE_ADD_PROPERTY, > >> > > > Graph.Features.VertexFeatures.class)); > >> > > > > >> > > > I've created an issue for that to track things: > >> > > > > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP3-997 > >> > > > > >> > > > because it is a "breaking" change as it will open up tests and > >> possibly > >> > > > cause existing implementations to fail. If you'd like to submit a > >> PR > >> > for > >> > > > this little fix, as you were the reporter for it and as someone > who > >> can > >> > > > test it in a way that is currently failing for them, just let me > >> know. > >> > > > > >> > > > As for the this issue: > >> > > > Graph.Features.VertexPropertyFeatures.FEATURE_ADD_PROPERTY > >> > > > <==> Graph.Features.VertexFeatures.FEATURE_META_PROPERTIES - yeah > - > >> we > >> > > need > >> > > > to deprecate one of those as they are the same thing. Not sure if > >> > anyone > >> > > > has any preferences on that. in one sense, FEATURE_ADD_PROPERTY > is > >> > > better > >> > > > because it matches the approach for Vertex/Edge. > >> > > > >> > > On the other hand, the > >> > > > documentation refers to this feature as "meta-properties". I > guess > >> i > >> > > would > >> > > > go with keeping FEATURE_META_PROPERTIES and deprecating > >> > > > FEATURE_ADD_PROPERTY. I've created an issue as such: > >> > > > > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP3-998 > >> > > > >> > > If no one has any objections in the next 72 hours (Monday, November > >> 30, > >> > > > 2015 at 7:45am) I'll assume lazy consensus and we can move forward > >> with > >> > > > this one. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 7:35 AM, Stephen Mallette < > >> > spmalle...@gmail.com> > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > Hi Jonathan, thanks for bringing this up. It would be nice if > we > >> > could > >> > > > > expand coverage of our test suite by simply improving the way in > >> > which > >> > > > > features are applied. I was about to suggest a big set of > changes > >> > > when I > >> > > > > realized that FeatureRequirementSet.SIMPLE is just defined > >> wrong. It > >> > > > > shouldn't have > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > addFeatureRequirement.Factory.create(Graph.Features.VertexPropertyFeatures.FEATURE_ADD_PROPERTY, > >> > > > > Graph.Features.VertexPropertyFeatures.class)); > >> > > > > > >> > > > > it should just be: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 7:39 PM, Jonathan Ellithorpe < > >> > > > j...@cs.stanford.edu> > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> Hello all, > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> I am currently working on an experimental implementation of > >> > TinkerPop3 > >> > > > on > >> > > > >> an in-memory key-value store called RAMCloud. In the process of > >> > > running > >> > > > >> the > >> > > > >> unit tests I noticed that turning on support for persistence > did > >> not > >> > > > >> trigger any new unit tests in GraphTests. Looking into the > >> matter, I > >> > > > found > >> > > > >> that the unit test that tests this, shouldPersistOnClose, was > not > >> > > > >> executing > >> > > > >> because meta properties support is included in its feature > >> > > requirements, > >> > > > >> but I do not have support for meta properties. Oddly, though, > >> this > >> > > > >> features > >> > > > >> requirement seems to be superfluous, since the test does not > >> utilize > >> > > > meta > >> > > > >> properties. > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> An orthogonal issue seems to be that > >> > > > >> Graph.Features.VertexPropertyFeatures.FEATURE_ADD_PROPERTY <==> > >> > > > >> Graph.Features.VertexFeatures.FEATURE_META_PROPERTIES > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> Best, > >> > > > >> Jonathan > >> > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >
