Or rather we have more good ideas than good wills
Jacques Le Roux wrote: > Thanks for the proposition Ted, > > Unfortunately, we are not missing good ideas, but good wills... > > Jacques > > Ted Byers wrote: >> Something my team is beginning to do with our system, is to create a >> pair of scripts, one of which applies any changes to our database >> (particularly focussing on ALTER TABLE statements, to add new fields >> along with rational default values and constraints), and another to >> deal with changes to our code (all written in Perl+SQL+Javascript - so >> you wouldn't be interested in the details). If the update process is >> automated, it really doesn't matter how many changes there are, >> because the script handles it all. Of course, this doesn't help in >> situations in which one takes the approach of storing specific data as >> a hash of the data rather than the raw data, and then one decides to >> use a different hash algorithm to make the hash (passwords are an >> obvious example). But in such cases, one ought to do a couple things: >> 1) provide an option to allow use of the original algorithm, and 2) >> provide an option to let the user use the new algorithm when the old >> password expires (or one can automate that, but that requires a little >> extra code). This isn't all that new an idea as I recall using diff >> on C/C++ files what seems like eons ago. But perhaps it is time that >> such an idea was applied to OFBiz? Of course, that means that someone >> needs to take responsibility for maintaining such a pair of scripts. >> >> Just a thought... >> >> Ted >> >> On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Jacques Le Roux >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> To reassure you Skip, OFBiz is more mature now, there should be less >>> changes the next time you will do it. >>> Except, if we want to take advantage of Java 8 : >>> http://www.techempower.com/blog/2013/03/26/everything-about-java-8/ >>> Of course, updating more often should help... >>> >>> Jacques
