On Oct 2, 2006, at 12:08 PM, Rick McGuire wrote:
David Blevins wrote:
On Oct 2, 2006, at 11:28 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
I'm so excited for this I can hardly wait. I feel like a kid in
december dreaming of the wonderful presents I'll get :D
And I'm dying to get this checked in! You have no idea how many
build changes, package changes, repository changes, etc. I've had
to marshall this code through to reach this point :-)
Probably feedback you don't want to hear, but it is possible to
submit patches as you go :) Not *everything* has to be perfect
before you submit the code. I know it's not easy, just sayin'. ;)
Were you a committer (likely scenario), we'd hope you'd check in
what you have on a periodic basis instead of going several months
between like Mr. Cabrera always used to. He'd always be
complaining about code changing too -- I had to beg and plead to
get him to check code in. But it's all good cause now I get to
pick on him for it ;)
Regardless, we appreciate your effort greatly. I'm also looking
forward to the code!
Normally, I'd agree with you. But I really only just reached the
point where I have code that can be checked in without breaking the
existing corba support. It was a case of needing to get things
cleaned up enough that things could coexist. Now if I could just
get a set of patches to submit that would stay good for a day or
two :-)
Hehe. Sounds like you just got unlucky. Definitely keep an eye out
for proposed changes that would disrupt you further. We might be
able to hold them till you get your stuff in.
-David
Rick
-David
Rick
-dain
On Oct 2, 2006, at 7:43 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
On Sep 29, 2006, at 3:01 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
Since I need to redo the packaging for the Yoko ORB support
I've been working on, this is a good time to ask the
question. In the process of creating the Yoko support, I
copied what was done with the sunorb and created a subpackage
of org.openejb.corba to contain the yoko adapters. This gave
the tree packages of org.openejb.corba.yoko and
org.openejb.corba.sunorb.
Then, when I split these two out into separate modules so
they were built as separate units, I maintained those package
names. Is it legitimate to still use the org.openejb.corba
parent package (which is "owned" by the openejb-core module),
or should I create a new package structure for this? I was
originally thinking org.apache.openejb.orb.yoko and
org.apache.openejb.orb.sunorb, but having two different
modules share the same packaging is making me a little
uneasy. Perhaps org.apache.openejb.yoko.orb and
org.apache.openejb.sun.orb would be better choices. Anybody
have any preferences, or should I just keep what I was using
originally?
Why would we want to keep the sun orb stuff around if we have
the lovely Yoko code that does the same thing?
Because until we've successfully completed the tck, we don't
know it does the same thing. Once we've verified that the yoko
code is a full function replacement to the sunorb, then we can
decide to chuck it out. But until we can verify it, or at
least know what needs to be fixed to make things pass, we still
need to keep the other code around as an option.
Rick
