Michael Mraka wrote:
Jeff Ortel wrote:
% Jan, I appreciate you comments :)
%
% Jan Pazdziora wrote:
% >On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 11:24:33AM -0400, Jeff Ortel wrote:
% >>>The views/rhnHistoryView.sql file seems to still contain definition of
% >>>rhnHistoryView_pkglist function. Is that correct?
% >>Hmm... didn't expect to find function definitions in a view file so I
% >>didn't look. I agree this function should be split out and the view.deps
% >>updated.
% >
% >This file was just an example.
% >
% >If we are touching the file in any way, even if just moving it from
% >one directory to another, and especially with this large schema
% >restructuralization effort, the commit of the file is basically a seal
% >of correctness. If we did not check the files manually or with some
% >tools, we should not be changing or moving the file.
%
% This really isn't practical. This was a massive effort. We had to touch
% 400+ files and certifying semantic correctness on files we simply moved is
% asking a lot. The goal was semantic equivalences which can be checked by
% validating the installed schema.
Well, but once the 'constraint wust_type_nn not null' was changed to
'NOT NULL' the schemas will not be equivalent. Contraint names will differ.
Although it doesn't matter for satellite operation it's unacceptable change
for the upgrades.
I checked this before making the change.
ALTER TABLE A modify c1 null;
This command will remove the NOT NULL constraint regardless of whether it was created by
adding a named constraint of using the NOT NULL keywords.
% >I'm much in favor of schema validation tools which will in rpm
% >build time catch issues like this one.
% >I'm very much against
% >reformatting tools that just change the spacing and lowercase to
% >uppercase, if they do not contain the overall validation parts as well.
% >
%
% Chameleon is not a formatting tool and was not applied to simply change
% spacing and case. It was used to automate some of the refactoring process
% and the reformatting was a byproduct. Besides, the files examples you've
% sited for semantic checking were not reformatted at all. Seems like your
% primary disagreement is that the files were reformatted at all which makes
% them difficult to diff. If everyone feels that reformatting these files
% prevents accepting this work into master, we can re-implement this part of
% the refactoring.
One issue per commit, please.
Chemeleon did refactoring + reformatting + code optimization.
How can anyone review the real changes?
I've got completely lost in the diffs... :(
--
Michael Mráka
Satellite Engineering, Red Hat
_______________________________________________
Spacewalk-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
_______________________________________________
Spacewalk-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
