Updated ARC is posted at http://wikis.sun.com/display/WebStack/MySQL+51ArcCase
Please review Thanks Sunanda Jyri Virkki wrote: > Lars Heill wrote: > >> We would appreciate comments on this ARC case as soon as possible, >> would like to reach build 105. >> > > If the ARC case has not been filed yet (I assume, since we're > reviewing it here now ;-), there's just about no chance to making b105 > which closes Dec.8. > > > sunanda menon wrote: > >> http://wikis.sun.com/display/WebStack/MySQL+51ArcCase >> > > In s.2.1 & 2.2, are any of these new or different (apart from the > obvious s/5.0/5.1/ change)? Since this is an update case, best to > highlight only that which is new or different. > > If these are mostly the same, I'd reduce all of 2.1 and 2.2 to simply > a section saying the path prefix goes from "[/usr|/etc|/var]/mysql/5.0/" > to "[/usr|/etc|/var]/mysql/5.1/" and everything else remains the same > (and if a few things are new/different, call those out specifically). > > Focusing only on what's new/different makes it easier for ARC > reviewers and easier for you ;-) > > > Same in s.2.3, I haven't looked up the old case but most of this > sounds familiar, what has changed? > > > s.4, my usual small nit, don't "propose" package names, say what you > will do. The assertive voice works best for functional specs/ARC cases. > Just a nit.. > > > s.6, if the symlinks are project private they are not useful for > anything since nobody is allowed to refer to them ;-) > The symlinks need to be Volatile. > > The new package names are interfaces, presumably Uncommitted? > > Also remember to update the spec based on Martin's comments that the > dtrace probes are incorrect. The correct ones going into this > integration of 5.1 need to be listed. (Volatile is ok, given the > documented explanation.) > > >
