Could the generated database be different with this new patch? If so, that's a total showstopper for me. And yes we use Sybase.
Instinctively I feel that behaviour changes doesn't belong in minor point releases regardless though. I'm not a developer, so just my 2p. Thanks Joe On 30/09/06, Thomas Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The problem addressed in http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TORQUE-44 was that in java generation, the constants for Column names are generated in upper case, while in sql generation, case is preserved. So there is a msismatch between those two. This usually does not matter, as sql standard says that column name mathcing should be case-insensitive, but as usual, there are some databases which do not keep to the standard (in this case sybase) So Thoralf went ahead and submitted a patch, and I committed it. However, if you change now from Torque 3.2 to 3.2.1-dev, the constants for the column names in generated java code change. So if one has stored these constants in some other place (like a database) in an application, any comparisons between the constants and the stored column names will not produce the same results as before, causing the application to fail. Greg ran into this problem in an application of his, so this concern is not far fetched. The question is now whether we want to make this change in a minor release or not. So far, everybody has agreed that this was a bug when it was coded this way, but Greg's argument was that this behaviour has become a standard in some sense. My personal opinion is +0.1 for changing the constants to preserve case, because it is not a big change and does not affect the "usual" Torque use cases. If we can not make such a small change, we would be reduced to nothing but fixing things which are obvious bugs between smaller releases. I am aware that the best possible approach would be to use a svn branch for fixing obvious bugs, and another for stuff which might break anything, but this would need a lot of effort in merging and I do not see this to be justified (I know what I'm talking about here, having merged the 3.1.1-branch and the 3,2-dev branch, and in some cases it was just praying that it woukld work out all right) So please give your opinions whether we want to keep this change in the 3.2.1 release or whether we should wait for a major release to put this in. Thomas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
