Chris, can you elaborate on your proposal? Are you suggesting that we stop using JPA? Or perhaps, to focus on one DB (MySQL)? As I won't probably be reading emails until Sunday evening (CET), I'll say that my vote is -1 for my first guess, and +0 for my second guess (I use MySQL but I don't want to interfere with those who may want to use other db system).
+1 on the Greg proposal, btw El 28 de octubre de 2011 17:45, Rubén Pérez <[email protected]> escribió: > Chris, can you elaborate on your proposal? Are you suggesting that we stop > using JPA? Or perhaps, to focus on one DB (MySQL)? > > +1 on the Greg proposal, btw > > > 2011/10/27 Nils Birnbaum <[email protected]> > >> +1 for both from me. Both will help us to deliver the quality we and the >> adopters await with our limited ressources. >> >> Nils >> >> > Hi Greg, >> > >> >> I #propose that sometime within the next week I will go through all of >> >> our entity classes, manually specify the column lengths and fix the >> >> naming schemes. The column lengths will be set large enough to >> >> satisfy 99% of the cases (longtext, bigint) across the board. This >> >> will make it much easier to keep the DB schemas, and their expensive >> >> hand-coded indexes up to date. >> > >> > +1, and I'm willing to help review the work if you would like. >> > >> > Hank brought up an important issue at our adoption meeting this morning >> > that I feel strongly about as well. Having it be "well defined" as to >> > what we support and what we don't would be good, and minimizing our >> > surface area would help maintain reliability. I'm going to skip OS >> > discussion here and hit the db issue instead: because we use JPA it >> > shouldn't be hard to change DBs. But, it is, because JPA sucks and/or >> > is difficult to do some things in. So we still need hand coded ddl >> > scripts. I would like to #proposal that we switch to a single rdbms. >> > That we only maintain scripts for one rdbms, and that we encourage >> > sysadmins to just modify them as they need to for their rdbms. It >> > should be straight forward, but it lowers our qa needs. >> > >> > Of course, such a db would be MySQL. >> > >> > If you're voting -1 on this, we need some fresh ideas on how to >> > maintain the schemata over time; 1.2 was released with bugs in the ddl >> > which puts serious egg on our face (and potentially data loss for >> > people adopting!) >> > >> > NOTE: These two proposals are in one thread, so if you're voting make >> > it clear which you are voting for. >> > >> > Chris >> > -- >> > Christopher Brooks, BSc, MSc >> > ARIES Laboratory, University of Saskatchewan >> > >> > Web: http://www.cs.usask.ca/~cab938 >> > Phone: 1.306.966.1442 >> > Mail: Advanced Research in Intelligent Educational Systems Laboratory >> > Department of Computer Science >> > University of Saskatchewan >> > 176 Thorvaldson Building >> > 110 Science Place >> > Saskatoon, SK >> > S7N 5C9 >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Matterhorn mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn >> > >> > >> > To unsubscribe please email >> > [email protected] >> > _______________________________________________ >> > >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Matterhorn mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn >> >> >> To unsubscribe please email >> [email protected] >> _______________________________________________ >> > >
_______________________________________________ Matterhorn mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn To unsubscribe please email [email protected] _______________________________________________
