on 1/17/00 3:38 PM, george stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Fine, then abstract out the opl.database.Db* stuff
>> from opl as well. Do you
>> see my point? Why not make a generic "bridge" that
>> can work with any other
>> DB pooling framework that also is not dependant on
>> opl (through package
>> naming)?
> Actually, it's that way. The broker manager is a
> generic bridge. You can implement any pooling scheme
> you want as long as your broker satifies the
> interface.
Right, but it is in the opl package.
> Move the db stuff from persistence broker to
> dbconnection, and let it percolate up. Then, you
> don't need the catch/finally junk.
Huh? The connection still will not be closed.
> It's actually bad marketing to keep it in turbine.
> Who can see it there?
Lots and lots of people if you market it right.
> After all the work I did, I've
> gotten close to zero feedback. Probably, it would
> help tremendously to have a working sample.
Welcome to Open Source development, here is why you have gotten zero
feedback:
#1. Zero documentation. You did not even write anything up to put into the
/docs/ directory. This directory is mirrored onto the
java.apache.org/turbine/ website. You can get plenty of acknowledgement
there. You didn't even add anything to the FSD.html file.
#2. Zero examples.
#3. No ability to define the database mapping via xml. This part still needs
to be completed. there is no way that i'm going to hand code all that stuff
to define the database table schema.
#4. very little javadoc. If you look at ECS and Village and even other parts
of turbine, not only is there a lot of javadoc, but there are also a lot of
comments in the code explaining what it does. just putting code out there
with no documentation and expecting people to give feedback on it is wrong.
Please don't blame the lack of feedback on the users...it is you who needs
to make it more visible and you do have plenty of ways of doing that within
the current framework/project. (see example ways above).
FYI, there is about 150 people on this mailing list now. That is about 145
that is being quiet. ;-(
> In an earlier mail, I gave Scott a db class and a
> hand-coded class map. Only thing missing is the
> pooling code. Marc Minch would let apache use his.
> jon, hope your not feeling too much heat but the
> design of the turbine stuff doesn't work for the
> broker interface. I think this is a flaw in turbine,
> not vice versa.
Exactly what "turbine stuff" are you talking about here? what is the "flaw"
that you are talking about. dude, making blanket statements like that
without any backing or explanation is totally uncalled for and kinda rude.
We (Frank John and I) have been putting our code up in public view now since
day one. You can submit changes, you can submit feedback, etc. But just
saying that "turbine stuff" is "flawed" is totally unacceptable.
-jon
--
Come to the first official Apache Software Foundation
Conference! <http://ApacheCon.Com/>
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
