db-ojb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Clute, Andrew" <Andrew.Cl...@osn.state.oh.us>
Subject RE: OJB usability - part 1 of 5: versioning policy
Date Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:35:13 GMT
A general comment based on all five parts of your email:

When can we see patches from you to fix these changes?

-Andrew




-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Giordano [mailto:giordano@more.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 10:51 AM
To: ojb-dev@db.apache.org
Subject: OJB usability - part 1 of 5: versioning policy


OJB developers:

The following feedback intends to provide constructive comments to the OJB
developers to improve the project as a whole.  The experiences and
observations are meant to stimulate development of world class software. An
open source dB persistence layer solution is needed and OJB may be
positioned to provide this in the future.

We initially began using OJB earlier this year when it looked like a 1.0
production release was on its way soon. Release candiate 1 was out and 
others
quickly followed indicating rapid progress. We felt confident there 
would be a
release by this fall, well within our timeframe for a production deployment.

But, the release notes themselves, illustrate well that OJB is, in fact, 
not a
release candidate at all. OJB is at best still in a BETA status. With the
changes we see regularly occurring, it could arguably be considered still in
an early BETA status.  They all start with the following statement:

-----------------------------------------------------
NEW FEATURES:
- With this release we are feature complete for the 1.0 release! For 1.0 you
should not expect more features to be added.

...

and then to proceed with the list of changes to the API.  This is completely
contradictory.  It started with rc2 and has continued on even with rc5.  The
interfaces are being modified all the time.  New interfaces are being added.
For example, the Metadata Manager has a new feature for handling threaded
repositories called profiles that was introduced in rc4.

As a result of continual changes to the API, our development effort with OJB
suffered from breaking code as new "release candidates" were delivered.

The standard expectation for a release candidate is to have all its 
class and
interface method signatures frozen.  At the time a project's status is voted
as a release candidate it needs to be at the stage of final testing and
debugging. We believe this reflects conventional best practices that are
adhered to with many of the other open source projects in existence.

At this point, we've lost all confidence that OJB is ready for release 
with a
stable, unchanging API to be developed against.

Chris Giordano
giordano@more.net



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org


Mime
View raw message