On 25/06/07, Caroline Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Simon Laws wrote: > On 6/23/07, Pete Robbins > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> I have created a maintenance branch */incubator/tuscany/branches/sdo- >> cpp-pre2.1/* >> Work towards SDO 2.1 specification compliance will continue in HEAD. >> Pete, thanks for creating the branch, it will be helpful in keeping the php implementation stable while this is going on. I understand it's hard to say how long you think the branch will be necessary, but are you going to have some groundrules about the use of the branch? I would hate to see the branch and the trunk diverging, in the sense of fixes being applied to one and not the other.
I would anticipate only putting fixes into the branch "on request". Any fix in the branch should also be applied to HEAD.
Sorry Pete, was a bit slow off the mark getting to your email. The branch > approach works fine for PHP SCA_SDO. We should be doing ongoing development > for C++ SDO in HEAD so no problems from my point of view. I don't know how > much of the non specified interface to C++ SDO the PHP SDO implementatoin > is using if any but we should be trying to work toward the specified > interface also. A fair amount actually, but I am making an assumption that once the changes are in place, the migration effort will be largely refactoring. That is, that the non-spec function will resurface in Tuscany implementation classes (if not adopted by the spec). If this is not the case, then the response from the php implementation could be different.
Do you have a list of the non-spec interfaces PHP is using? I believe the getUserData interfaces were added for PHP use?? Cheers, ---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Pete
