I am sorry for ignoring the patches, but the only reason is because of lack of time. I have gotten in the habit of filing the patches for later examination. But I know I get a bit irritated if I get no response on a patch after about a week and yet I have not responded accordingly.
Based on first impression I plan to commit your smaller patches. I will take the time this weekend to look at the changes to make using a single torque installation possible. john mcnally On Fri, 2002-06-21 at 21:15, Stephen Haberman wrote: > [was originally "RE: standalone patch - patched" but Byron's post > prompted me into a long-winded discussion I'd been sitting on for > awhile] > > (The short answer to Byron's post is that the patch works for me, some > other guy had troubles with it. I'd really like to take the time to > improve it, but I haven't for reasons elaborated below). > > The patch does work, but not as elegantly as it should be. I was going > to sit down a few days ago and try to make it as elegant as possible, > but got absolutely no feedback from this list on the issue (specifically > whether my choice of renaming properties to make controlling where > Torque reads/writes stuff much more customizable, while still retaining > backwards compatibility). > > Which is a bit of a sore point, for personal reasons, of course, but I'm > certainly not the only one who receives an eerie silence whenever > anything except a bug fix is posted. > > Case in point is the "Status of Criteria patch" that was posted just > before this. I'm just getting into Torque and don't know much about the > technical viability of the patch. It seems good to me, but I can't > really say whether it should be committed or not (nor is it my place to > say). > > But the people who do have a say in whether it's getting or not (e.g. > Jon, John, Jason, Martin, etc.) haven't said a word about it. > > Another case is a few Turbine-3 patches I've posted to turbine-dev. Most > are basic NullPointerException-type fixes that just get ignored. > > Now, I know everyone is busy. Jon, John, Jason, etc., work on a zillion > different projects. Scarab, Turbine-3, Turbine-2 maintenance, Betwixt, > Avalonizing Fulcrum, Maven, JCS, etc., etc., are all projects you guys > are actively involved. Plus I'd imagine you also have to do real work on > top of all of that. > > It just seems like Torque is getting left out a bit as you're spreading > yourselves too thin. Granted, it's fairly stable and mature, and > ...John...or Jason, I forget who, committed some great new data source > code awhile ago. > > Which is awesome, I really appreciate your work, but it'd also be nice > if you could open up a little bit to people trying to help out. At least > take a few minutes to respond and tell us why our patches suck or aren't > spiffy enough to make it into CVS. > > I can take criticism...tell me what's wrong in anything I submit and > I'll try and fix it. Or just tell me to go to hell and stop wasting my > time and yours. Any type of response is better than none. > > Perhaps this is the result of Turbine's sub-sub-project abuse mentioned > on the avalon-dev list the other day. > > I wasn't around before the decoupling, but I imagine it was a fairly > strong community. But now with the decoupling, plus other project you > guys are interested in, having you guys spread out across all of the > sub-sub-projects is weakening the community. I don't know the exact > requirements for Jakarta projects...2-3 active developers per > sub-project? But I feel that if some of the current Turbine > sub-sub-projects where to apply for sub-project status, they'd be > denied. > > I don't mean to lay all the blame on you guys and say you're horrible > project owners; you're not. And you could make a very valid argument > that the user community is at fault for not having other people step up > and contribute more when you guys get busy. > > And that makes sense, but my tongue-in-cheek comment is that it's hard > for people in the user community to step up when the doors aren't > exactly being held open. > > You guys do awesome work; I can't stress that enough. And we probably do > need to have a few of you guys spread across several projects so that > brain-sharing occurs and they all work really well together (e.g. > Turbine-3 becoming avalonized and using Excalibur/Fulcrum components). > > I dunno, just venting a bit. Please, let me know what's going through > your guys' head. If I'm full of crap, tell me. If I have a few good > points, a few bad points, tell me. > > This is also my first real foray into an open source community...is this > just normal and I haven't adjusted yet? > > I'll also agree to the argument that not every patch is a good patch, > even if it works for whatever problem the author was having, that > doesn't necessarily mean it belongs in the repository. You guys do a > great job of screening such patches, though I think it's more a passive > process then active, but the thing that pisses me off is that the > screening method consists of just ignoring it. > > I don't have hard statistics about how many patches are/aren't ignored, > so maybe I'm over-exaggerating the problem because I'm emotionally > involved. Because there is still support, you committers haven't left us > completely high and dry. Though I don't think it's the case, maybe I'm > looking for that personal response to every minute post that I chastised > that guy over in scarab-dev for expecting...wouldn't that be ironic. > > Dunno, I don't mean to be too harsh and I almost decided not to post > this. But what the hell, the worst you guys can do is not respond. :-| > > Thanks, > Stephen > > Ps. Please, do really respond. I'm young (it probably shows) and > impressionable and will learn by whatever response is given, good or > bad. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Byron Foster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 6:43 PM > > To: Turbine Torque Developers List > > Subject: Re: standalone patch - patched > > > > > > Hello Stephen, I wanted to try out this patch but I have a few > > questions about it. > > > > We've found it combersome to try and use Torque in our projects from a > > configuration standpoint. We've had to make application specific > > versions of build-torque.xml file to use it in our apps. Ideally We > > would only work with a build.properties file and within that file we > > would specify the necessary directories such as the torque home > > directory, ouput directories for sql and OM java files, etc... I know > > that some of these properties can already be specified, but not to the > > point that they are independent of torque-build.xml. The application > > would then only contain the torque-build.properties file. > > > > Does this patch address these issues? > > > > Thanks, > > Byron > > > > Stephen Haberman wrote: > > > Okay, for some stupid reason I assumed that the last standalone > patch I > > > posted would work because it worked for my maven project. I ran into > > > some misc. problems today and in the process realized the patch > probably > > > never worked for either non-classpath or non-maven project. > > > > > > I've now tested it with/without maven and with/without the > -classpath > > > targets. I'm humbly resubmitting it to the list if anyone like to > try it > > > again (or for the first time). > > > > > > If I'm not approaching it the right way, am missing something, or > should > > > just stop trying altogether, let me know. > > > > > > (Btw, rather than having targets for both classpath and > non-classpath > > > tasks, wouldn't it be a heck of a lot easier to just have it be a > > > property in the build.properties and get rid of all the duplicate > > > targets?) > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:turbine-torque-dev- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:turbine-torque-dev- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
