Hi all... I would like to take the chance and jump in to help and have some free cycles this weekend and the coming days, but I would like to have some hints/directions about what needs to be done.
Looking forward to your reply On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Kevin Meyer - KMZ <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Dan, > > Thanks for raising this issue... > > I have just returned from a long vacation and will probably have some > time on my hands again (there are issues with my work permit > application). This means that I may be in a position to pick up the SQL > objecstore again. > > I will need several more days to settle in, though. I will contact you > again for more help on what needs to be done ;) . > > If it still turns out that I will not have time, I'll not resist dropping the > SQL OS for the next release.. :) > > Regards, > Kevin > > On 30 Aug 2012 at 10:58, Dan Haywood wrote: > >> All, >> >> As you might have noticed, I've been tapped away implementing [ISIS-14], >> namely adding a JDO object store implemented using DataNucleus (DN is >> Apache 2.0 licensed, and is the reference implementation for the JDO spec). >> >> At the same time, I've been doing other work to simplify down the runtime >> components within Isis. One of these was the removal of the remoting >> support (ISIS-131), another was making Oids immutable and self-describing >> (ISIS-216), another was collapsing the Version hierarchy (ISIS-245), >> another was storing version information inside Oids to simplify concurrency >> checking (ISIS-248). >> >> Most of these changes shouldn't impact existing objectstores/viewers etc >> (and open up the possibility of simpifying them in the future); however >> ISIS-216 in particular was a big change. Rob Matthews has been ensuring >> that the in-memory object store, the NoSql and the XML object stores work >> with the changes introduced here. However, Kevin Meyer, the primary >> maintainer of the SQL object store, has not been able to be as involved in >> the project as much as previously, and so no additional testing has been >> performed on SQL os with respect to these changes. >> >> For myself, I'm uncomfortable releasing the SQL object store without some >> additional testing. That said, I'm unenthusiastic to do it myself because >> my intention is to use the JDO object store going forward. >> >> I know that the SQL object store and JDO object store don't overlap exactly >> in their use cases; one of Kevin's objectives for the SQL os was to have >> annotation-free domain models, which most certainly is *not* the case with >> a JDO object store. On the other hand, DataNucleus has many more features >> than our own SQL os; my suspicion is that newcomers would probably prefer >> to use an established ORM rather than a home-grown one. >> >> Therefore, my proposal is that we retire (perhaps temporarily, perhaps for >> good) the SQL object store as of 0.3.1-incubating. >> >> Thoughts, votes, opinions, please! >> >> Thx >> Dan >> >> >> [ISIS-14] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ISIS-14 >> [ISIS-131] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ISIS-131 >> [ISIS-216] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ISIS-216 >> [ISIS-245] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ISIS-245 >> [ISIS-248] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ISIS-248 >> > -- Thanks - Mohammad Nour ---- "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving" - Albert Einstein
