db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Luigi Lauro (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (DERBY-2469) Java Web Start JNLP PersistenceService API storage support
Date Wed, 13 Jun 2007 18:19:26 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2469?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12504360
] 

Luigi Lauro commented on DERBY-2469:
------------------------------------

Here my answers:

@Mike: Ok, sorry man, from next patch on, the paths will be relative to derby root, don't
worry :) My mistake, is that I just checked out what I needed and not the whole tree ^_^

Also, regarding jdk1.4: I will look into it once the feature is complete and stable. A backporting
to 1.4 should be really easy to do, but I prefer to stick with 1.5 in the meanwhile, for easiness
of coding (for each, generics, etc...). :D

@Kathey: you got me completely wrong. I don't think a MATURE STABLE 10.3 'official feature'
JNLPStorageFactory is anytime near. I won't ever think such a delicate feature (storage) would
ever go into such a quality product as derby, without a long and deep QA.

What I meant is that I would really love some help with the testing/code review here, to get
feedback and see what I may have done wrong (I HAVE surely done something wrong, given my
little derby experience, even being a quite experienced java programmer as I am). If 'checking
it in' as "EXPERIMENTAL - TURN IT ON AND YOU DIE" could make more ppl willing to give it a
try and provide feedback, then you have my vote for 10.3 experimental inclusion.

But of course, any choice will be fine for me :)

@David: Man, I love your plan ;-) And btw, org.apache.derby.impl.io.jnlp all the way, given
where the other StorageFactory implementations reside currently.

Regarding the unit testing I did for my classes: nothing 'givable', mostly manual unit testing
for checking the correctness of the most obvious features.

I was planning to add a full JUnit unit testing once I got more knowledge about the StorageFactory
internals: I still have some doubts if I got it right by reading the other factories and checking
javadocs, and becuase of that, I could have coded wrong tests with wrong assumptions, by doing
them before even knowing exactly HOW each method should perfectly behave (the javadocs are
NOT entirely clear on these matters, and I had to dwelve into the code to check my assumptions).

I heard there is a 'storage' junit test suite, and that would probably be the first thing
to test out once we get it running past the first obvious mistakes that will come out.

One final note: sorry guys for asking for help on this, I know it would have better to work
on it 24/7 to have a more 'mature' feature and then submit for reviewal, but given my little
derby experience I would have lost a lot more time this way, and my employer doesn't want
me to spend too much time on this unluckily (other things have priority right now).

> Java Web Start JNLP PersistenceService API storage support
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-2469
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2469
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: Store
>    Affects Versions: 10.2.2.0
>         Environment: Java Web Start
>            Reporter: Luigi Lauro
>            Assignee: David Van Couvering
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 10.3.0.0
>
>         Attachments: svn-diff-20070329, svn-diff-20070606, svn-diff-20070612
>
>
> I would love to have Derby write/read to the storage area provided by the JNLP PersistenceService
API.
> Since Derby is now bundled with the Java6 JDK as JavaDB, I think this  integration would
go a long way towards making derby more developer- friendly in Java Web Start environments,
where using the sandbox tools Sun provides us it the right way to go, instead of working 
around it and force the user to give the app the authorization to write on the hard drive
IMHO.
> I'm investigating the effort needed to provide an implementation of the WritableStorageFactory
interface around the PersistenceService API, and if that's doable in a few days work, I will
start working on it and submit a patch for testing/approval ASAP.
> Feel free to volounteer and provide pointers/hints/whatever, it's really appreciate,
especially since I currently know nothing of derby internals.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


Mime
View raw message