Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A2C08B2DE for ; Sat, 31 Dec 2011 09:04:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 21775 invoked by uid 500); 31 Dec 2011 09:04:59 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 20934 invoked by uid 500); 31 Dec 2011 09:04:52 -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 20920 invoked by uid 99); 31 Dec 2011 09:04:48 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 31 Dec 2011 09:04:48 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of akarasulu@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.178 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.125.82.178] (HELO mail-we0-f178.google.com) (74.125.82.178) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 31 Dec 2011 09:04:40 +0000 Received: by werp12 with SMTP id p12so9031102wer.37 for ; Sat, 31 Dec 2011 01:04:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=WMjlUeNOPVY1hnaHGOiyJFhqBG95fF6WOz86E0HUa1k=; b=JuNj1Kd3Luryr+sEHABKqnt/yf56PQWzHFgHI55q9xbRZWKRd+k5QK2/A4HBqUsSJX a3oJ+jS3RJBreH68hAXl/YecvnqomtwHNBgpeBRw+NqHuzDA5iiHaEPC79q6Gv13xbZo UwckCkdbhAYde/oR5qvubpeIDNC7SdulD4ew8= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.136.234 with SMTP id w84mr28973505wei.9.1325322260317; Sat, 31 Dec 2011 01:04:20 -0800 (PST) Sender: akarasulu@gmail.com Received: by 10.180.103.97 with HTTP; Sat, 31 Dec 2011 01:04:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4EFD8157.9050001@apache.org> References: <4EFCFE0C.8040602@gmail.com> <4EFD8157.9050001@apache.org> Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 11:04:20 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: Pt1ZyIdQNyHh_NiGBPtQlb-wo6o Message-ID: Subject: Re: Txn heads up From: Alex Karasulu To: Apache Directory Developers List , "elecharny@apache.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6d7e5b08a05f604b55fa2ad X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --0016e6d7e5b08a05f604b55fa2ad Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Friday, December 30, 2011, Emmanuel L=E9charny wrote: > On 12/30/11 8:25 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote: >> >> I'm trying to balance two different concerns with the activity I am seeing >> in the TXN branch. First I know we need to move forward on this matter and >> second I know Selcuk will be trying to work although with less time on this >> while dealing with a relocation and we're altering much of it: the movin= g >> target problem. Then again having more people capable of working in this >> region is a big plus. Let's just make sure that the changes are really >> necessary instead of just moving code around. That way we can make it >> easier for Selcuk to get back into the code when he has time. > > I don't know what make you feel that we are just 'moving code around'. This is the first important commit done on this branch, and I carefully balanced the pros and cons of doing it. The reason why I pushed this big chunk of code is that I wasn't able to move forward without making a difference from mandatory changes (those I committed) and some changes I may want to revert. In any case, having pushed one unique commit is the guarantee we can rollback it completely in one shoot. > Cool. Just nervous since this is so important for us. Not suggesting what u are doing is needless. Sometimes we do however make some formatting changes. I did that too while looking in this branch. It gives me a comfort level to have it in our format. Although tees changes are not a big deal. > Now, everything in this commit has been discussed on the mailing list. There is no surprise, and nothing critical has been changed to the transaction layer (yet). > Thats great - please disregard my concerns here - they're seeming now not to be driven by reality but by fear. I myself need to give this more time but as what seems to be the usual I get less and less time :(. > There is one single issue that need to be addressed, the encapsulation of transactions. This is not easy to address. I would like to help on this > > Obviously, it would be way easier if Selcuk had time to dedicate on this, but as he said, he is currently relocating, and is not available. He even asked on the mailing list for someone to relay him, which is what I'm doing. I guarantee you I'm extremely careful, and I'm not trying to go too fast. Cool again I apologize for the unfounded concerns. > > Last, not least, as you said, having more than one committer being able to work on the code is not only important, it's vital. I have no idea if Selcuk's employer will allow him at all to continue to work on an OSS project (yes, this is a burden, and no, it's not about Selcuk, it's a problem for each one of us. In France, for instance, you have to ask your employer if you want to work on an OSS project, even on your own time). It would be very, very sad if it were the case, because Selcuk's code is really good and bring us to a level we would not have been able to reach without a lot of efforts. >> Yeah we need more peeps in this area and u are doing a great job. >> I know that none of us would make changes just to make a change. But her= e >> if you can just give some extra effort and consideration before making a= n >> alteration so we can keep it as familiar to Selcuk as possible when he gets >> back. Of course on the other hand if we have to advance and the change i= s >> critical then we must change it. > > I think I have given all the extras efforts, plus a bit more, trust me on that. I *wish* I was not the only one spending time on this part of the code (Selcuk is helping as much as he can), it could be much better and faster. I appreciate that you care and share such a concern, though. > I'm perhaps more panic oriented having less time to be involved - this my problem. > I'll be MIA for the next two days, so I wish an happy new year to all of you guys ! > Have a great new year! Alex > -- > Regards, > Cordialement, > Emmanuel L=E9charny > www.iktek.com > > --=20 Best Regards, -- Alex --0016e6d7e5b08a05f604b55fa2ad Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Friday, December 30, 2011, Emmanuel L=E9charny <elecharny@apache.org> wrote:
> On 1= 2/30/11 8:25 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
>>
>> I'm tryin= g to balance two different concerns with the activity I am seeing
>> in the TXN branch. First I know we need to move forward on this ma= tter and
>> second I know Selcuk will be trying to work although w= ith less time on this
>> while dealing with a relocation and we= 9;re altering much of it: the moving
>> target problem. Then again having more people capable of working i= n this
>> region is a big plus. Let's just make sure that the = changes are really
>> necessary instead of just moving code around= . That way we can make it
>> easier for Selcuk to get back into the code when he has time.
&= gt;
> I don't know what make you feel that we are just 'movin= g code around'. This is the first important commit done on this branch,= and I carefully balanced the pros and cons of doing it. The reason why I p= ushed this big chunk of code is that I wasn't able to move forward with= out making a difference from mandatory changes (those I committed) and some= changes I may want to revert. In any case, having pushed one unique commit= is the guarantee we can rollback it completely in one shoot.
>

Cool. Just nervous since this is so important for us. Not sugge= sting what u are doing is needless. Sometimes we do however make some forma= tting changes. I did that too while looking in this branch. It gives me a c= omfort level to have it in our format. Although tees changes are not a big = deal.


> Now, everything in this commit has been discussed on the maili= ng list. There is no surprise, and nothing critical has been changed to the= transaction layer (yet).
>

Thats great - please disregard my = concerns here - they're seeming now not to be driven by reality but by = fear. I myself need to give this more time but as what seems to be the usua= l I get less and less time :(.

> There is one single issue that need to be addressed, the encapsula= tion of transactions. This is not easy to address.

I would like to h= elp on this

>
> Obviously, it would be way easier if Selcu= k had time to dedicate on this, but as he said, he is currently relocating,= and is not available. He even asked on the mailing list for someone to rel= ay him, which is what I'm doing. I guarantee you I'm extremely care= ful, and I'm not trying to go too fast.


Cool again I apologize for the unfounded concerns.

>
&= gt; Last, not least, as you said, having more than one committer being able= to work on the code is not only important, it's vital. I have no idea = if Selcuk's employer will allow him at all to continue to work on an OS= S project (yes, this is a burden, and no, it's not about Selcuk, it'= ;s a problem for each one of us. In France, for instance, you have to ask y= our employer if you want to work on an OSS project, even on your own time).= It would be very, very sad if it were the case, because Selcuk's code = is really good and bring us to a level we would not have been able to reach= without a lot of efforts.
>>

Yeah we need more peeps in this area and u are doing a grea= t job.


>> I know that none of us would make changes just t= o make a change. But here
>> if you can just give some extra effor= t and consideration before making an
>> alteration so we can keep it as familiar to Selcuk as possible whe= n he gets
>> back. Of course on the other hand if we have to advan= ce and the change is
>> critical then we must change it.
> > I think I have given all the extras efforts, plus a bit more, trust me= on that. I *wish* I was not the only one spending time on this part of the= code (Selcuk is helping as much as he can), it could be much better and fa= ster. I appreciate that you care and share such a concern, though.
>

I'm perhaps more panic oriented having less time to be invo= lved - this my problem.

> I'll be MIA for the next two days, = so I wish an happy new year to all of you guys !
>

Have a grea= t new year!

Alex


> --
> Regards,
> Cordialement,
> = Emmanuel L=E9charny
> www.iktek.com<= /a>
>
>

--
Best Regards,
-- Alex
--0016e6d7e5b08a05f604b55fa2ad--