Mailing-List: contact dev-help@polygene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@polygene.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: hedhman@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <88c4a1c0882a647e95b9d1932af0cfbe@nosphere.org>
References: <CADmm+Kd56fMG2kwgp50VxtBvfPCiVe-LjzFJ_aY_=_rVDS8vmA@mail.gmail.com>
 <88c4a1c0882a647e95b9d1932af0cfbe@nosphere.org>
From: Niclas Hedhman <niclas@hedhman.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 14:10:47 +0800
Message-ID: <CADmm+KfM_3-y7a6jPVFTa10SnHZNeyKW0HPUuccrhaLKJLCMMA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Ver 3.0 coming...
To: dev@polygene.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114111da49790b054cc9d73b
archived-at: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 06:11:20 -0000

--001a114111da49790b054cc9d73b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

It has been good couple of mornings, and most smaller issues for 3.0 has
been ticked off.

And that lands us with ONE issue left, and that is the Indexing-SQL one.

I will take another stab at it now, but if I can't figure this out, I am
inclined to drop dev-status to 'beta' and it will not be released. Any and
all help is highly appreciated.


On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 5:17 AM, Paul Merlin <paulmerlin@apache.org> wrote:

> Hey,
>
> Yay for the upcoming 3.0-RC1!
>
>
> Le 2017-04-07 17:54, Niclas Hedhman a =C3=A9crit :
>
>> Hi,
>> I want to push hard for a release at end of next week. I am looking
>> through
>> the remaining 3.0 marked issues, and
>>
>> Timeseries --> postpone
>>
>
> OK
>
> Entity =3D Identity+Value --> Postpone indefinitely (too much consequence=
)
>>
>
> We can look at this one in very different ways and see small increments
> that can give us some goodness without eating the whole cake. What I woul=
d
> like us to do quickly, and preferably for 3.0, is to change how Entity
> state is serialized in our EntityStore SPI helpers.
>
> Today, the "value" part of an EntityState is mixed with entity aspects:
>
> {
>   reference: "..",
>   application_version: "..",
>   type: "..",
>   version: "..",
>   modified: "..",
>   properties: {..},
>   associations: {..},
>   manyassociations: {..},
>   namedassociations: {..}
> }
>
> I'm thinking about persisting entities with the following structure
> instead:
>
> {
>   identity: "..",
>   application_version: "..",
>   type: "..",
>   version: "..",
>   modified: "..",
>   value: { // Exact same state (de)serialization as values
>     myProperty: {..},
>     myAssoc: "..",
>     myManyAssoc: [..],
>     myNamedAssoc: {..}
>   }
> }
>
> This is quite simple to change, simplifies a lot of code and I'm willing
> to push that forward rather quickly.
> I already have a local experiment of this change.
> BUT, this is a breaking change of the storage format so before doing so
> I'd like to know what do you all think.
> 3.0 is a good time to do this. Don't want to wait for 4.0. If we want to
> push a version out prior to that change, then it should be a -ALPHA1
> instead of a -RC1.
>
> Java 9 issues --> postpone, Java 9 is not out yet
>>
>
> OK, everything works without Jigsaw already
> There's only the Riak client that does not support Java 9 yet.
>
> Yeoman generator --> will complete
>>
>
> If we release the generator to npm we need to sort out how to do that the
> ASF way.
>
> ORM --> just postponed, too much effort to release within weeks let alone
>> days.
>>
>
> OK
>
> Pluggable Types --> I don't know that status. Paul? Postpone if needed.
>> (POLYGENE-94)
>>
>
> I answered directly on the issue. Please follow up there.
>
> Mapping in toEntity/toValue --> Will investigate, possibly implement
>> otherwise postpone.
>>
>
> This should not be too complicated, but we can also postpone to 3.1 as an
> API enhancement.
>
> Rhino -> javax.scripting --> working on it.
>>
>
> Cool
>
> Jar Signing --> I don't know, and look at Paul the build master for
>> opinion. (POLYGENE-116)
>>
>
> Postpone! It may be a bit of a can of worms.
>
> OSGi not working --> Postpone (I am secretly giving up on OSGi)
>>
>
> I personally don't use OSGi at all and don't care much.
>
> Cocnerns/SideEffect on methods --> I will investigate, test and document =
if
>> it works. Otherwise postpone.
>>
>
> OK
>
> POLYGENE-121 + 122 --> would like to fix, IF I knew better what you meant=
.
>>
>
> Those are minor enhancements we can do in 3.1.
>
> POLYGENE-132 --> Might be a big one. I have not fully understand what Ken=
t
>> was concluding, but might be important.
>>
>
> Kent?
>
> Indexing-SQL  --> Really tough one. I don't think I have enough time to f=
ix
>> this. So, do we cut it out of the release and revive it later? Or is the=
re
>> someone volunteering to take a stab at it?
>>
>
> Stan?
>
>
>
>


--=20
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://polygene.apache.org - New Energy for Java

--001a114111da49790b054cc9d73b--