Martin,
I appreciate your point, but Rick's is valid to.
Sometimes it's easy to get the general feeling that people think
iBATIS or the ASF is a business, and they expect our project to work
for them.
However, this is not a business. I don't make any money from iBATIS
(as in ZERO). I've contributed my time for free for over 8 years
now. The framework does what it does. I do what I can do. And I
prioritize based on what I want to do -- which can be influenced, but
not controlled, by the opinions of the community.
It's a hobby for me. I use my own framework. The prioritization of
what gets done is largely driven by popular community vote, bug
criticality and my own needs (as with any other committer who is
entitled to prioritize their own features by their own needs --
responsibly).
If there were a way to commercialize it, I would be more than happy to
write docs for other people, write specs for other people, implement
features for other people, and even make a lot of improvements and
enhancements that I know are possible -- for other people.
Unfortunately the practicality of commercialization disappeared the
moment I contributed iBATIS to the Apache Software Foundation.
Therefore the best we can do is based on our own time available.
Anyone interested in contributing is welcome to join. I recommend
reading carefully about the Apache Software Foundation first...
http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html
Then I recommend you file an ICLA with the Apache Software Foundation
-- after you carefully read and understand it.
http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt
Then start building your merit through responsible contributions to
the framework.
Otherwise, file a Jira ticket, try to get community support and
encourage the existing team to support your needs.
Cheers,
Clinton
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Martin Ellis <ellis....@gmail.com
<mailto:ellis....@gmail.com>> wrote:
Rick,
I don't think making facetious comments is likely to help,
particularly when talking about people who already submit patches, and
submit feedback on betas.
Martin
On 7 April 2010 17:46, Rick.Wellman <rick.well...@kiewit.com
<mailto:rick.well...@kiewit.com>> wrote:
> Hey Clinton,
> You've got volunteers coming out of the woodwork ;-)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Ellis [mailto:ellis....@gmail.com
<mailto:ellis....@gmail.com>]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 11:43 AM
> To: user-java@ibatis.apache.org <mailto:user-java@ibatis.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: SqlSession.close() without committing
>
> One thing I'd have liked to see is an indicator of which
packages are
> intended as API packages for public consumption, and which packages
> are implementation.
>
> The idea being that I'd like to minimise dependencies on
'private' API.
> There're a few incentives to do that:
>
> * making sure you're using a well-trodden code paths - they tend
to be
> well tested;
> * reducing the likelihood of having to rework code when upgrading to
> later versions;
> * ensuring you're not caught out if iBATIS ever gets an OSGI
> MANIFEST.MF, which prevents importing private packages.
>
> For example, right now I have a dependency on BoundSql - and I've no
> idea whether that's likely to be maintained as part of a stable API.
>
> I don't share the cynicism about Javadoc - I can think of plenty of
> libraries outside the JDK with useful Javadoc. For example, the
> Apache Commons javadocs tend to be very good, describe corner-cases
> like null-handling, and have class javadocs that show useful
examples.
>
> I've been completely baffled by how MetaClass, MetaObject,
> ObjectFactory and ObjectWrapper and ObjectWrapperFactory are
related,
> and what they're used for. I don't know whether they're all
> considered public API, but I've had to trace through them tracking
> down bugs.
>
> Martin
>
>
> On 7 April 2010 16:53, cowwoc <cow...@bbs.darktech.org
<mailto:cow...@bbs.darktech.org>> wrote:
>> Clinton,
>>
>> I'm not looking for a specification in that sense of the
word :) I meant
>> something along the lines of Design by Contract:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_contract
>>
>> If my code depends on iBatis and upgrading to a newer
version breaks my
>> code then how do we establish whether the problem is:
>>
>> 1. The iBatis implementation no longer conforms to its
specification (i.e.
>> an iBatis bug)
>> 2. My code assumed something about an iBatis method that was
not guaranteed
>> by the specification (i.e. a bug in my application)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Gili
>>
>> On 07/04/2010 9:50 AM, Clinton Begin wrote:
>>
>> Then you might be happier with a spec like JPA. Although I'd
warn that such
>> specs are rarely implemented consistently.
>>
>> This is what has killed J2EE vs. the alternatives. Look at the
history:
>>
>> * CMP - Spec. Dead, along with all implementations.
>>
>> * EJB - Spec. Dead. Spring killed it -- not a spec.
>>
>> * JDO - Spec. Dead, along with all implementations.
>>
>> * JSF - DOA. Bad idea to begin with, and has failed to unify
client side
>> Java. Struts, GWT, Wickett, Stripes, ZK, Tapestry, etc. all
still exist --
>> and are more popular than JSF -- all without a spec.
>>
>> Some specs have succeeded, due to their simplicity and natural
interface
>> boundary (usually a network connection requiring a driver of
sorts). These
>> include Servlet, JDBC and JMS. Even though they're not the
nicest, they're
>> simple and necessary. Yet they too differ in many ways,
especially JDBC.
>> JPA has a chance, but only because they essentially took the
two most
>> popular frameworks that weren't specs and made them into a
spec... nobody
>> will be winning any innovation awards for that one.
>>
>> The spec doesn't guarantee anything. Kind of like a green
light doesn't
>> guarantee that cars won't be driving through the opposing red
light at an
>> intersection... do you not check?
>>
>> The only thing that defines how a framework will work is the
framework
>> itself -- spec or not. The only protection you have is your
own unit,
>> functional and integration tests -- which you need anyway, as
it's also the
>> only way you'll know if YOUR code works.
>>
>> We've created a user guide to describe the intended behavior of
the iBATIS
>> framework. If it is somehow incomplete or incorrect, you can
contribute to
>> it via the wiki discussed on page 2.
>>
>> Clinton
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 10:37 PM, cowwoc
<cow...@bbs.darktech.org <mailto:cow...@bbs.darktech.org>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Yes, iBATIS will rollback the connection if it deems it
necessary. The
>>>> only
>>>> time you might need to call rollback explicitly is if you
have a "select"
>>>> that actually updates data in the database. Such is
sometimes the case
>>>> with
>>>> stored procedures.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Clinton,
>>>
>>> Coming back to our earlier discussion of Javadoc... where do
you document
>>> the iBatis specification? I hope you understand my reluctance
of depending
>>> on behavior outside of an explicit specification. Today one
person will tell
>>> me the method works one way, tomorrow another person will tell
me a
>>> different story. I'd love to have an official document to
refer back to.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Gili
>>>
>>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
user-java-unsubscr...@ibatis.apache.org
<mailto:user-java-unsubscr...@ibatis.apache.org>
>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
user-java-h...@ibatis.apache.org
<mailto:user-java-h...@ibatis.apache.org>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-java-unsubscr...@ibatis.apache.org
<mailto:user-java-unsubscr...@ibatis.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
user-java-h...@ibatis.apache.org
<mailto:user-java-h...@ibatis.apache.org>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-java-unsubscr...@ibatis.apache.org
<mailto:user-java-unsubscr...@ibatis.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: user-java-h...@ibatis.apache.org
<mailto:user-java-h...@ibatis.apache.org>
