db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew McIntyre <mcintyr...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: New SQL JIRA components (was Re: setting component's on jira items.)
Date Wed, 01 Feb 2006 09:11:40 GMT

On Jan 30, 2006, at 9:33 AM, Kathey Marsden wrote:

> On Jan 23, 2006, at 10:25 PM, Satheesh Bandaram wrote:
>> This sounds good, balancing what is good for users and developers
>> working with JIRA's limitations. So, I would suggest:
>>
>> SQL
>> SQL-parser
>> SQL-optimizer
>> SQL-compiler
>> SQL-datatype
>> SQL-execute or SQL-executor (First one matches 'execute' package  
>> name)
>
> Should issues in the subcategories also be marked as SQL?
>
> I personally am not so keen on it  because
>
> -   makes it all the more liikely that  issues will be assigned the
> wrong components
> -  adds more maintenance
> -  I am guessing we will gets lots of questions about where to put  
> issues.

Perhaps a better breakout, based on the current organization of the  
code, would be:

SQL  (== parser/datatypes/standards compliance)
Optimizer  (== reorg of query tree)
Compile/Execute (== java representation of optimizer-selected query)

Based on a quick review of the issues filed in JIRA, this makes sense  
to me. If I were to reclassify some of the current issues assigned to  
the SQL component, I would assign them as follows (by JIRA number):

SQL - 20, 69, 277, 396, 464
Optimizer - 269, 713, 781, 837, 890
Compile/Execute - 28, 176, 338, 438, 759, 887

And anything that crosses these boundaries should be assigned  
multiple components, such as SQL and JDBC, with DERBY-215. Or Store  
and Optimizer with DERBY-886.

But, I'm sure there will be other opinions on the list. I won't make  
any changes until there's something resembling consensus. :-)

andrew



Mime
View raw message