So, we seem to be seeing a lot of regressions in various DFDL schemas like most recently NITF, previously PNG.
What if users run into this in their own DFDL schemas? These are showing unparser deadlocks due to cyclic relationships. At one time we discussed adding a "big hammer" property or tunable that simply turns off alignment, as a workaround for all these sorts of alignment issues. I am wondering if we will need that so that users can work around these alignment issues in their schemas. Changing these schemas for 3.3.0 compatibility is highly undesirable (as was done for PNG), even if the changes are backward compatible. (Though if the schemas are actually incorrect in some way that we're now detecting more effectively, that is the right fix.) On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 11:38 AM Interrante, John A (GE Research, US) < john.interra...@ge.com> wrote: > +1 > > I personally have no blocker or urgent issues that must be fixed before > the next release (only some things I will need to start working on in the C > backend, "Runtime 2," to handle some more complicated schemas). > > How will the roadmap for upcoming releases ( > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DAFFODIL/Roadmap+for+Upcoming+Releases) > change as a result of 3.3.0 being released asap? > > John > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Beckerle <mbecke...@apache.org> > Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2022 10:44 AM > To: dev@daffodil.apache.org > Subject: EXT: [DISCUSS] need to release Daffodil 3.3.0 > > WARNING: This email originated from outside of GE. Please validate the > sender's email address before clicking on links or attachments as they may > not be safe. > > A number of people are asking for 3.3.0, with its many bug fixes, to be > released asap. > > Are there any remaining issues that must be fixed before this release? > > Otherwise I'd like to suggest we release 3.3.0. >
