Rodney Schneider wrote: > On Wed, 10 Jul 2002 02:54, you wrote: > > >>Turbine 2.1 was released more than a year ago. >>I think it's time for 2.2 ;-) > > > +1 > > >>status: >> >>2.2-dev works with the decoupled version of torque except for the security >>service. 2.2-dev works with some parts of fulcrum (i'm using fulcrums >>xml-rpc service) > > > Here is a quote from a post by Brian Lawler: > > "There are a few key classes in the gray area between Torque and Turbine. > Most notably, DBConnection, Criteria, and StringKey (these are the ones I > have run into so far) that exist in both modules. The existing Turbine > API's use the Turbine versions of the crossover classes." > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg07559.html > > Just for interest sake, have these issues been addressed in 2.2-dev yet?
the db service will be deprecated. it will be a facade for torque (i'll try to keep it as compatible as possible) the security service will use the decoupled torque this stuff is still todo, but i will be done before the next beta on friday ;-) > > >>plan: >> >>*) change the security service to use the decoupled torque and remove the >>coupled version + the coupled version has some problems which are fixed in >>the decoupled version + the coupled version is unmaintained >> + it will be easier to change to turbine-3 >> - this will brake backwards compatibility!! (package names, Vector -> >> List) > > > So, is the idea to remove the coupled version of Torque completely? I guess > that would be one quick way of finding out all the classes in the Turbine API > that rely on the old Torque... just recompile and see how many errors show > up :) that's the plan ... > > >>*) leave the services as they are (at least for turbine 2.2) >> - it would be hard to make turbine 2.2 work with fulcrum > > > I think that is the best decision. Services like the Upload Service et. al. > are still reliant on the Turbine 2.x RunData interface, so I can imagine it > would be difficult to make these a part of Fulcrum and have them work with > both Turbine 2.x and Turbine 3.x. right. i think the service stuff in turbine 2 is in good shape, while the coupled torque is unmaintained and the decoupled version includes tons of bugfixes .. that's why we will use the decoupled torque but keep the old services martin > > Thanks for all your hard work and good luck! > > -- Rodney > > -- > 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]>
