Rob van Maris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As promised, I have recently done substantial testing of the code
> resulting from the database search query project.
> After some final adjustments, the code provides excellent backward
> compatibility with the previously existing code, including SCAN-related
> code. 
> 
> This concludes the project. 

Congratulations. I'm generally very pleased with the results, and the new
possibilities, and I've tried to use it quite a lot while making an 'bridge'
interface to it, and e.g. adding the 'searchquery' possibilities to taglib.

I only have a few small issues wandering in my head:
- NodeSearchQuery did not seem very useful, bridge version 'NodeQuery' does
  not even (always) wrap it currently. And it is not an interface, so
  NodeQuery also cannot simply be a NodeSearchQuery.
- I found it odd that 'aggregation' is a field.
- I think the opposite of 'greater' is 'smaller' and not 'less'. (In
  FieldCompareConstraint)
- ..
don't now how important these are, but I've said it at least!

Furthermore I do think that perhaps this bridge version of SearchQuery
is not 'ready'. Mainly it needs review, and people should perhaps check if
it actually is sufficiently complete and user-friendly.

I'm not sure in the frame-work of which project this should be finished;
MMCI2 or search-query project the sequel. It needs not be finished before
the upcoming release, but it does need to be 'stable' (not subject to any
change, only to addition). In other words, if people want to criticize about
these new 'searchquery' methods and templates in bridge, they should do it before
1.7.0! After that, it is too late.

Btw this last remarks goes more generally, also e.g. for other new bridge
methods and the new tags. I welcome any discussion about these, but
after the release only bugfixing and new features can be done!

Michiel

-- 
Michiel Meeuwissen 
Mediapark C101 Hilversum  
+31 (0)35 6772979
nl_NL eo_XX en_US
mihxil'
 [] ()

Reply via email to