Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" <dev@directory.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of elecharny@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.214.50 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <4FA3BA0B.7080001@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 13:14:19 +0200
From: =?UTF-8?B?RW1tYW51ZWwgTMOpY2hhcm55?= <elecharny@gmail.com>
Reply-To: elecharny@apache.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Apache Directory Developers List <dev@directory.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Triggers and SPs vs release
References: <4FA3930D.3000002@gmail.com>
 <CADwPi+HuLO=9fuNPWo39i_qbT7fJbuHyun4jMSin=Ewx=bhmJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FA3AAAD.2050404@gmail.com>
 <CADwPi+HExEEpMRDasjDFd4j9J1YXBGxY0=Z=COWYTCnW8+HxNw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CADwPi+HExEEpMRDasjDFd4j9J1YXBGxY0=Z=COWYTCnW8+HxNw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Le 5/4/12 12:20 PM, Alex Karasulu a écrit :
> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny<elecharny@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Le 5/4/12 12:02 PM, Alex Karasulu a écrit :
>>
>>   On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny<elecharny@gmail.com>**
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>   Hi guys,
>>>> now that trunks is stable and fast, I try to spend some time to fix the
>>>> @Ignored Triggers/SP tests.
>>>>
>>>> As we moved away from JNDI, it impacted the associated code, and it was
>>>> never fixed. I think it's about time...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   For now I advise ignoring the SP and Trigger code fixes. First because
>>> the
>>> MVCC code and transaction subsystem will impact the implementation and we
>>> need to rethink the implementation. After the transaction branch and the
>>> OSGi branch are merged in to trunk I think it's a good time to consider
>>> these features again.
>>>
>> Really, atm, it's just about getting JNDI out of the code.
>
> Well if it's just a matter of getting the tests running yeah it's not a big
> deal.
>
> In terms of the big picture I think all this code needs to be
> reimplemented. The trigger and SP specifications need to be better defined.
> Handling chain recursion issues needs to be reconsidered because we've
> removed the InvocationStack I think or it's not being leveraged. Everything
> should be gutted IMHO.
I can't agree more. And you haven't mentionned the AdministrativeModel 
we have to get fixed...
>
>
>> The idea is to have something that works *before* we get the txn code
>> merged, because then we will have a base to start with.
>>
>> Those tests has been @Ignored since 2008 :/
>>
>>
>>
> Yeah that's why I don't think it's worth the time to deal with it. We
> should just focus on the TxN and OSGi side then reimplement it together.
There is little I can do regarding those thwo things. My idea was to cut 
a release today or tomorrow, in order to have a stable base for the next 
iteration.


-- 
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com