Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 97367 invoked from network); 17 Jan 2007 13:42:42 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 17 Jan 2007 13:42:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 75420 invoked by uid 500); 17 Jan 2007 13:42:48 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 75214 invoked by uid 500); 17 Jan 2007 13:42:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 75203 invoked by uid 99); 17 Jan 2007 13:42:47 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 05:42:47 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of elecharny@gmail.com designates 209.85.132.243 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.132.243] (HELO an-out-0708.google.com) (209.85.132.243) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 05:42:38 -0800 Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id b15so1144841ana for ; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 05:42:17 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=k7VSw349ixfNqdIogNWnRiqM4085KHKMdnaD0dou7PiRUTTPLUlbzLUy8c4K5TUJITx7SPMKfJAlBubswt8fdguqEpZZhoT+nIcklTTTMZMDpP1wDkTYPRbLdnry6Jod7/nG55h9dEzbFUx/QyEidrX6u7IiZOnwns/OVba90Ck= Received: by 10.64.27.7 with SMTP id a7mr9977245qba.1169041336919; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 05:42:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.65.95.11 with HTTP; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 05:42:16 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 14:42:16 +0100 From: "Emmanuel Lecharny" Reply-To: elecharny@iktek.com To: "Apache Directory Developers List" , akarasulu@apache.org Subject: Re: Backwards compatibility (was: Re: Issue with multi valued attributes) In-Reply-To: <45AE1F75.6020204@apache.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_100137_26724411.1169041336874" References: <45AE1F75.6020204@apache.org> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org ------=_Part_100137_26724411.1169041336874 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On 1/17/07, Alex Karasulu wrote: > > Since we made the change to LockableAttributesImpl etc in shared-ldap > this will now impact the store which has serialized objects. > > The db for 1.0.0 and 1.0.1 are not compatible. You must export the DB > then reimport it to goto 1.0.1. > > We can rollback this change in 1.0.x. There was no need to rename these > classes. > > This is the reason why I say not to change the 1.0.x branch drastically > and only to fix bugs. Changing the name of a class in ldap-shared was > fine for 1.5.x but not for 1.0.x. In general don't get too enthusiastic > in the 1.0 branch. Well, I think we have had a quick discussion on this point, and as far I remember, you didn't vetoed the rennaming. But you sghould have :) I perfectly agree that i was not a good move to rename those classes in 1.0.x, even if it was a good idea in 1.5. We can rollback the modification if needed (as 1.0.1 is not released yet, this could be a good timing). However, I just wonder if the renaming will be the only problem that we wil= l have : the classes AttributesImpl and AttributeImpl not only have been renamed, but they have been modified ( a new field has been added into AttributesImpl), so the serialized classes won't be compatible anyway. That is the bad news. We can get rid of this field if really needed (it's a flag which is set if the attribute name are case sensitive : in Ldap all the attributes name are case insensitive). Such a modification isfeasible, and won't cost a lot (let's say 30 minutes, tests included). So what do we do ? Should we roll back this useless change that breaks backwards > compatibility between 1.0.1 and 1.0.0? I would vote +1, but it won't be a rollback, only a fix of the fix : renaming back to the initial name, and removing the flag, forcing all the attribute's name to be case insensitive. It drive me to express another concern : what about the installer ? Christine asked yesturday how we will manage to keep the files and configuration of X.Y.(N-1) when upgrading to X.Y.N. We may also think about a export/import process for data, or maybe simpler, a dump of all data just to avoid any loss. Damn... So much things we missed ! Regards, > Alex > > > Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: > > Well, good question ... > > > > There is no such option atm in the installer. It would be very cool if > > you could fill a JIRA about this problem, so we will be sure not to mis= s > > it when releasing 1.0.1. > > > > So far, what you can do is to backup your server.xml, and reinstall > > above the previous install (same directory). The data should not be > > deleted ( but do a backup to be safe). Then, restore the server.xmlfile= . > > > > Emmanuel > > > > On 1/16/07, *Tony Thompson* > > wrote: > > > > Yes, thank you. I installed it and it is working great. > > > > That brings me to another question though. If I am running 1.0.0 > > and I want to upgrade to 1.0.1, the installer seems to overwrite > > things like my server.xml config file, etc. How do I do the upgrad= e > > so it doesn't mess with my current configuration? > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Emmanuel Lecharny [mailto:elecharny@gmail.com > > ] > > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2007 4:05 AM > > To: Apache Directory Developers List > > Subject: Re: Issue with multi valued attributes > > > > Emmanuel Lecharny a =E9crit : > > > > > Tony Thompson a =E9crit : > > > > > >> I am using Windows. If you could get an install together, that > > would > > >> be great. > > >> > > >> > > Thanks to Christine, the Windoze installer is now available here : > > > http://people.apache.org/~elecharny/apacheds-1.0.1-SNAPSHOT-win32-setup.e= xe > > > > All other installer are also here : > > http://people.apache.org/~elecharny > > > > Emmanuel > > > > This message (and any associated files) is intended only for the > > use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may > > contain information that is confidential, subject to copyright or > > constitutes a trade secret. If you are not the intended recipient > > you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or > > distribution of this message, or files associated with this message= , > > is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, > > please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deletin= g > > it from your computer. Messages sent to and from Stoneware, Inc. > > may be monitored. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Cordialement, > > Emmanuel L=E9charny > > www.iktek.com > > > > --=20 Cordialement, Emmanuel L=E9charny www.iktek.com ------=_Part_100137_26724411.1169041336874 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline

On 1/17/07, Alex Karasulu <akara= sulu@apache.org> wrote:
Since we made the change to LockableAttributesImpl etc in shared-ldap
th= is will now impact the store which has serialized objects.

The db fo= r 1.0.0 and 1.0.1 are not compatible.  You must export the DB
= then reimport it to goto=20 1.0.1.

We can rollback this change in 1.0.x.  There was no= need to rename these
classes.

This is the reason why I say not t= o change the 1.0.x branch drastically
and only to fix bugs.  C= hanging the name of a class in ldap-shared was
fine for 1.5.x but not for 1.0.x.  In general don't get t= oo enthusiastic
in the 1.0 branch.

Well, I think we= have  had a quick discussion on this point, and as far I remember, yo= u didn't vetoed the rennaming. But you sghould have :)

I perfectly agree that i was not a good move to rename those classe= s in 1.0.x, even if it was a good idea in 1.5. We can rollback the modifica= tion  if needed (as 1.0.1 is not released yet, this could be a good ti= ming).

However, I just wonder if the renaming will be the only problem tha= t we will have : the classes AttributesImpl and AttributeImpl not only have= been renamed, but they have been modified ( a new field has been added int= o AttributesImpl), so the serialized classes won't be compatible anyway= . That is the bad news. We can get rid of this field if really needed (it&#= 39;s a flag which is set if the attribute name are case sensitive : in Ldap= all the attributes name are case insensitive).

Such a modification isfeasible, and won't cost a lot (let's= say 30 minutes, tests included). So what do we do ?



<= blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 2= 04, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Should we roll back this useless change that breaks backwards
compatibil= ity between 1.0.1 and 1.0.0?

I would vote +1, but it w= on't be a rollback, only a fix of the fix : renaming back to the initia= l name, and removing the flag, forcing all the attribute's name to be c= ase insensitive.

It drive me to express another concern : what about the installer ?= Christine asked yesturday how we will manage to keep the files and configu= ration of X.Y.(N-1) when upgrading to X.Y.N. We may also think about a expo= rt/import process for data, or maybe simpler, a dump of all data just to av= oid any loss.

Damn... So much things we missed  !

Regards,
Alex


Em= manuel Lecharny wrote:
> Well, good question ...
>
> There is no such option at= m in the installer. It would be very cool if
> you could fill a JIRA = about this problem, so we will be sure not to miss
> it when releasin= g=20 1.0.1.
>
> So far, what you can do is to backup your server.xml= , and reinstall
> above the previous install (same directory). The da= ta should not be
> deleted ( but do a backup to be safe). Then, resto= re the=20 server.xml file.
>
> Emmanuel
>
> On 1/16/07, *Tony= Thompson* <Tony.Thompso= n@stone-ware.com
> <mailto: Tony.Thompson@stone-ware.com>> wrote:
>
>  =    Yes, thank you.  I installed it and it is working gr= eat.
>
>     That brings me to another ques= tion though.  If I am running 1.0.0
>   &nbs= p; and I want to upgrade to=20 1.0.1, the installer seems to overwrite
>     thi= ngs like my server.xml config file, etc.  How do I do the upgrade=
>     so it doesn't mess with my current con= figuration?
>
>     -----Original Message--= ---
>     From: Emmanuel Lecharny [mailto:elecharny@gmail.com
>  &nb= sp;  <mailto:elecharny@gmail= .com>]
>     Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2= 007 4:05 AM
>     To: Apache Directory Developers List
&g= t;     Subject: Re: Issue with multi valued attributes<= br>>
>     Emmanuel Lecharny a =E9crit :
&g= t;
>      > Tony Thompson a =E9crit = :
>      >
>      >> I am using Windows.&nb= sp; If you could get an install together, that
>  &nbs= p;  would
>      >> be great= .
>      >>
>  &n= bsp;   >>
>     Thanks to Ch= ristine, the Windoze installer is now available here :
>     http://people.apache.org/~ele= charny/apacheds-1.0.1-SNAPSHOT-win32-setup.exe
>
> &nb= sp;   All other installer are also here :
>     http://people.apache.org/~elecharny
>
>  &n= bsp;  Emmanuel
>
>     This message (a= nd any associated files) is intended only for the
>   =   use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may
>     contain information that is confidential, = subject to copyright or
>     constitutes a trade= secret. If you are not the intended recipient
>   &nb= sp; you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or
>     distribution of this message, or files ass= ociated with this message,
>     is strictly proh= ibited. If you have received this message in error,
>  &nbs= p;  please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleti= ng
>     it from your computer. Messages sent to an= d from Stoneware, Inc.
>     may be monitored.>
>
>
>
> --
> Cordialement,
> Emma= nuel L=E9charny
> www.iktek.com <http://www.iktek.com= >






-- Cordialement,
Emmanuel L=E9charny
w= ww.iktek.com ------=_Part_100137_26724411.1169041336874--