Re: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1
So tallying the vote we have: Andrus Adamchik (PMC) +1 Aristedes Maniatis +1 Kevin Menard (PMC) +1 Michael Gentry (PMC) +1 I will publish the files later tonight and send an announcement. Thanks everybody!! Andrus On Jul 17, 2007, at 1:15 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote: [VOTE: approve 3.0M1 release] I posted artifacts for 3.0M1 release here: http://people.apache.org/~aadamchik/release/3.0M1/ There were almost no comments since I tagged M1. I've been cleaning things up, fixing various things (most notable is CAY-830 reported by Ari), doing more regression testing, etc. I think we are in a very good shape for a milestone release and I am anxious to get it out :-) Please take a looks and cast your votes. Thanks Andrus P.S. +1
Re: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1
Actually that's one of the things that are not going away, rather it is no longer recommended to use as an interception point for custom logic. I guess we can be more clear on that page about what's removed and what stays but is simply no longer considered the best practice. Andrus On Jul 27, 2007, at 4:58 PM, Michael Gentry wrote: I was reading on http://cayenne.apache.org/doc/lifecycle-callbacks.html that the setPersistenceState is going away, too (which I use). I set breakpoints in my code and it appears to still be called -- at least for this release. I have a feeling this is something I'll have to be on the lookout for ... Thanks, /dev/mrg
Re: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1
I was reading on http://cayenne.apache.org/doc/lifecycle-callbacks.html that the setPersistenceState is going away, too (which I use). I set breakpoints in my code and it appears to still be called -- at least for this release. I have a feeling this is something I'll have to be on the lookout for ... Thanks, /dev/mrg
Re: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1
On Jul 27, 2007, at 4:28 PM, Michael Gentry wrote: OK, I just made the lifecycle changes and my application runs again. This is a pretty good test (I do some funky stuff), at least on the older code (I don't have any JPA/etc in it). I'm +1 for this milestone release. Cool - so now we have three PMC votes! :-) I'm not saying the lifecycle stuff isn't useful, but I'm not convinced that making simple things more complex is a good thing, either. I hear you. This absolutely can not stay this way, and that's what "milestone" status means - it is usable, but not finished. BTW, callbacks can already be stored in the DataMap, only the Modeler support is missing. Andrus
Re: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1
OK, I just made the lifecycle changes and my application runs again. This is a pretty good test (I do some funky stuff), at least on the older code (I don't have any JPA/etc in it). I'm +1 for this milestone release. I'd like to put on my Devil's Advocate hat for a minute, though. (And keep in mind I'm still a NeXTer at heart.) To get it working with the new lifecycle stuff, I did: 1) Added the registry.addListener(LifecycleListener.POST_LOAD, MyDataObject.class, "fetchFinished"); calls in my ApplicationListener class. (It is a servlet-based application and this class receives the contextInitialized event, which is where I registered.) This step required me to go find all of my classes that implemented fetchFinished() so I could register each of them. 2) I created a new DataContextUtility singleton class (I didn't have a good globally-visible class available) to create new DataContexts. The real purpose of this class was to store the DataChannelCallbackInterceptor and ObjectStore instances so it could later create a DataContext with them as parameters. I chose to create the singleton so I wouldn't have to duplicate the code every place I created a new DataContext. 3) I had to go update every place I created a new DataContext and have it obtain one through the DataContextUtility singleton -- otherwise my fetchFinished methods would not be called. This all seemed to me to be a lot more work (and obfuscating) to accomplish something that used to "just work" in the past. The simple has become more complex (which seems to be the way of Java, with subclassing being evil and such). Now instead of one place (and a logical place in my mind) for the fetchFinished() code to reside, it is scattered across many classes. And if you forget to register a class, your method will never get called. I'm not saying the lifecycle stuff isn't useful, but I'm not convinced that making simple things more complex is a good thing, either. Just my rambling thoughts ... comments welcome. Back to the original thread of releasing now. :-) Thanks, /dev/mrg On 7/27/07, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jul 27, 2007, at 2:25 AM, Michael Gentry wrote: > > > Option 2 would be to remove it from the actual > > code and documentation since it looks like it is still supported. > > That would be my preference too - let's remove it M2. > > Andrus > >
Re: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1
On Jul 27, 2007, at 2:25 AM, Michael Gentry wrote: Option 2 would be to remove it from the actual code and documentation since it looks like it is still supported. That would be my preference too - let's remove it M2. Andrus
Re: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1
I was just pointing out that deprecated = gone in this case. :-) Option 1 is to make the code still call fetchFinished() for 3.0 and get rid of it in 3.1. Option 2 would be to remove it from the actual code and documentation since it looks like it is still supported. The downside to option 2 is that there would be no warning to the end-user. I just looked in the JavaDoc docs and I was hoping to find an @removed or similar, but didn't see one. I can do the PostLoad callback tomorrow. Just reporting what I'm finding thus far. /dev/mrg On 7/26/07, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: IMO with 3.0 being a major version change, it's a fair game to change API .. as long as we don't abuse it. And in fact you can setup a 'PostLoad' callback to invoke existing 'fetchedFinished' on your objects, so there is a reasonable replacement. Even better - since POST_LOAD is executed between DataContext and DataDomain, you won't even have to switch to ObjectContext. Instead you can instantiate the DC with this bit of extra wiring (that will hopefully go away in the following milestones): // postInterceptor can be shared between multiple DataContexts DataChannelCallbackInterceptor postInterceptor = new DataChannelCallbackInterceptor(); postInterceptor.setChannel(domain); ObjectStore objectStore = new ObjectStore (domain.getSharedSnapshotCache()); DataContext context = new DataContext(postInterceptor, objectStore); // here is how you would register callbacks (once per app) LifecycleCallbackRegistry registry = domain.getEntityResolver ().getCallbackRegistry(); registry.addListener(LifecycleListener.POST_LOAD, MyDataObject.class, "fetchFinished"); Andrus On Jul 26, 2007, at 9:30 PM, Michael Gentry wrote: > OK, I finally was able to try to migrate my old 1.2.x project to 3.0. > After some missing jar (log4j, common collections, etc) issues and > renaming all of my packages from objectstyle to apache, I was able to > launch the application but it doesn't work. A good portion of my > application depends on fetchFinished() being called. Yes, I know > fetchFinished() is deprecated and the implementation in > CayenneDataObject still exists (and still does nothing), but it > appears the code to actually call it when the fetch is finished has > been removed, so I get lots of NULL objects (I resolve a lot of things > after a 'notification' object is read in). If fetchFinished() is > deprecated, shouldn't it still be called? > > Thanks, > > /dev/mrg > > PS. It did a lot of nice-looking SQL before failing, though. :-) >
Re: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1
IMO with 3.0 being a major version change, it's a fair game to change API .. as long as we don't abuse it. And in fact you can setup a 'PostLoad' callback to invoke existing 'fetchedFinished' on your objects, so there is a reasonable replacement. Even better - since POST_LOAD is executed between DataContext and DataDomain, you won't even have to switch to ObjectContext. Instead you can instantiate the DC with this bit of extra wiring (that will hopefully go away in the following milestones): // postInterceptor can be shared between multiple DataContexts DataChannelCallbackInterceptor postInterceptor = new DataChannelCallbackInterceptor(); postInterceptor.setChannel(domain); ObjectStore objectStore = new ObjectStore (domain.getSharedSnapshotCache()); DataContext context = new DataContext(postInterceptor, objectStore); // here is how you would register callbacks (once per app) LifecycleCallbackRegistry registry = domain.getEntityResolver ().getCallbackRegistry(); registry.addListener(LifecycleListener.POST_LOAD, MyDataObject.class, "fetchFinished"); Andrus On Jul 26, 2007, at 9:30 PM, Michael Gentry wrote: OK, I finally was able to try to migrate my old 1.2.x project to 3.0. After some missing jar (log4j, common collections, etc) issues and renaming all of my packages from objectstyle to apache, I was able to launch the application but it doesn't work. A good portion of my application depends on fetchFinished() being called. Yes, I know fetchFinished() is deprecated and the implementation in CayenneDataObject still exists (and still does nothing), but it appears the code to actually call it when the fetch is finished has been removed, so I get lots of NULL objects (I resolve a lot of things after a 'notification' object is read in). If fetchFinished() is deprecated, shouldn't it still be called? Thanks, /dev/mrg PS. It did a lot of nice-looking SQL before failing, though. :-)
Re: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1
Oh yeah, in 1.2.x, ObjectResolver.objectFromDataRow(DataRow) is what called fetchFinished(). /dev/mrg On 7/26/07, Michael Gentry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: OK, I finally was able to try to migrate my old 1.2.x project to 3.0. After some missing jar (log4j, common collections, etc) issues and renaming all of my packages from objectstyle to apache, I was able to launch the application but it doesn't work. A good portion of my application depends on fetchFinished() being called. Yes, I know fetchFinished() is deprecated and the implementation in CayenneDataObject still exists (and still does nothing), but it appears the code to actually call it when the fetch is finished has been removed, so I get lots of NULL objects (I resolve a lot of things after a 'notification' object is read in). If fetchFinished() is deprecated, shouldn't it still be called? Thanks, /dev/mrg PS. It did a lot of nice-looking SQL before failing, though. :-)
Re: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1
OK, I finally was able to try to migrate my old 1.2.x project to 3.0. After some missing jar (log4j, common collections, etc) issues and renaming all of my packages from objectstyle to apache, I was able to launch the application but it doesn't work. A good portion of my application depends on fetchFinished() being called. Yes, I know fetchFinished() is deprecated and the implementation in CayenneDataObject still exists (and still does nothing), but it appears the code to actually call it when the fetch is finished has been removed, so I get lots of NULL objects (I resolve a lot of things after a 'notification' object is read in). If fetchFinished() is deprecated, shouldn't it still be called? Thanks, /dev/mrg PS. It did a lot of nice-looking SQL before failing, though. :-)
RE: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1
Things went well for me with the upgrade. I even took the opportunity to move from DataContext to ObjectContext in many locations. I'm liking most of the new API, too. A couple things I'm still not too keen on, but we can handle that separately. The biggest thing I would like to see is the documentation examples updated to use ObjectContext rather than DataContext. Aside from the one blurb in the overview section, it would appear that DataContext is still the preferred method. Otherwise, I'm +1 for the release. It seems pretty solid as far as traditional Cayenne is concerned. It'll be nice to get other people to beat on it as well. -- Kevin > -Original Message- > From: Kevin Menard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 12:59 PM > To: dev@cayenne.apache.org > Subject: RE: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1 > > I've been a bit behind the ball, but I'm going to try to deploy 3.0M1 > into one of our production systems this week. That should give me a > good enough idea as to how I'm going to vote. > > -- > Kevin > > > -Original Message- > > From: Andrus Adamchik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 6:15 PM > > To: dev@cayenne.apache.org > > Subject: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1 > > > > [VOTE: approve 3.0M1 release] > > > > I posted artifacts for 3.0M1 release here: > > > >http://people.apache.org/~aadamchik/release/3.0M1/ > > > > There were almost no comments since I tagged M1. I've been > > cleaning things up, fixing various things (most notable is > > CAY-830 reported by Ari), doing more regression testing, etc. > > I think we are in a very good shape for a milestone release > > and I am anxious to get it out :-) > > > > Please take a looks and cast your votes. > > > > Thanks > > Andrus > > > > P.S. +1 > > > >
Re: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1
Sorry, I didn't get to it today. It'll be next week before I can look. If you decide before then, I guess I'm a +0. I'm in favor of a release, but just haven't tried it. :-) Thanks! /dev/mrg On 7/19/07, Michael Gentry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I've been busy trying to get some stuff done before a trip out of town. I'll try to take a look at it today. I'm in favor of a release, but would like to try it out just a bit first. Thanks, /dev/mrg
Re: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1
I've been busy trying to get some stuff done before a trip out of town. I'll try to take a look at it today. I'm in favor of a release, but would like to try it out just a bit first. Thanks, /dev/mrg On 7/18/07, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It's been quiet on the list for the last couple of weeks. Wonder if all our PMC members are on vacation or soemthing? Andrus On Jul 17, 2007, at 1:15 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote: > [VOTE: approve 3.0M1 release] > > I posted artifacts for 3.0M1 release here: > > http://people.apache.org/~aadamchik/release/3.0M1/ > > There were almost no comments since I tagged M1. I've been cleaning > things up, fixing various things (most notable is CAY-830 reported > by Ari), doing more regression testing, etc. I think we are in a > very good shape for a milestone release and I am anxious to get it > out :-) > > Please take a looks and cast your votes. > > Thanks > Andrus > > P.S. +1 > >
Re: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1
On Jul 19, 2007, at 1:00 AM, Kevin Menard wrote: Hmm . . . I thought we were going to continue provide fat JARs for simplicity in deploying. Is this not the case? Can't find the thread right away, and not sure if we had a formal vote on this (this was definitely discussed at some point), but as of now we don't. Instead there's a "third-party" directory where we place what was in the fat JAR (to make it clear what's needed and to give users more control over the third-party versions). Also, zip archives are more common for Windows machines than gzip'd tarballs are. Not a big deal with any modern archive utility, but something to consider for the final deployment. Agreed - while there's no technical advantage to zip, tar.gz may scare some Windows users :-) Andrus
RE: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1
Hmm . . . I thought we were going to continue provide fat JARs for simplicity in deploying. Is this not the case? Also, zip archives are more common for Windows machines than gzip'd tarballs are. Not a big deal with any modern archive utility, but something to consider for the final deployment. -- Kevin > -Original Message- > From: Andrus Adamchik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 6:15 PM > To: dev@cayenne.apache.org > Subject: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1 > > [VOTE: approve 3.0M1 release] > > I posted artifacts for 3.0M1 release here: > >http://people.apache.org/~aadamchik/release/3.0M1/ > > There were almost no comments since I tagged M1. I've been > cleaning things up, fixing various things (most notable is > CAY-830 reported by Ari), doing more regression testing, etc. > I think we are in a very good shape for a milestone release > and I am anxious to get it out :-) > > Please take a looks and cast your votes. > > Thanks > Andrus > > P.S. +1 > >
Re: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1
It's been quiet on the list for the last couple of weeks. Wonder if all our PMC members are on vacation or soemthing? Andrus On Jul 17, 2007, at 1:15 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote: [VOTE: approve 3.0M1 release] I posted artifacts for 3.0M1 release here: http://people.apache.org/~aadamchik/release/3.0M1/ There were almost no comments since I tagged M1. I've been cleaning things up, fixing various things (most notable is CAY-830 reported by Ari), doing more regression testing, etc. I think we are in a very good shape for a milestone release and I am anxious to get it out :-) Please take a looks and cast your votes. Thanks Andrus P.S. +1
Re: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1
It's a good time to switch - now you'll be able to code the features you need straight into production ;-) Andrus On Jul 17, 2007, at 7:58 PM, Kevin Menard wrote: I've been a bit behind the ball, but I'm going to try to deploy 3.0M1 into one of our production systems this week. That should give me a good enough idea as to how I'm going to vote. -- Kevin -Original Message- From: Andrus Adamchik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 6:15 PM To: dev@cayenne.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1 [VOTE: approve 3.0M1 release] I posted artifacts for 3.0M1 release here: http://people.apache.org/~aadamchik/release/3.0M1/ There were almost no comments since I tagged M1. I've been cleaning things up, fixing various things (most notable is CAY-830 reported by Ari), doing more regression testing, etc. I think we are in a very good shape for a milestone release and I am anxious to get it out :-) Please take a looks and cast your votes. Thanks Andrus P.S. +1
RE: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1
I've been a bit behind the ball, but I'm going to try to deploy 3.0M1 into one of our production systems this week. That should give me a good enough idea as to how I'm going to vote. -- Kevin > -Original Message- > From: Andrus Adamchik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 6:15 PM > To: dev@cayenne.apache.org > Subject: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1 > > [VOTE: approve 3.0M1 release] > > I posted artifacts for 3.0M1 release here: > >http://people.apache.org/~aadamchik/release/3.0M1/ > > There were almost no comments since I tagged M1. I've been > cleaning things up, fixing various things (most notable is > CAY-830 reported by Ari), doing more regression testing, etc. > I think we are in a very good shape for a milestone release > and I am anxious to get it out :-) > > Please take a looks and cast your votes. > > Thanks > Andrus > > P.S. +1 > >
Re: [VOTE] Cayenne Release 3.0M1
On 17/07/2007, at 8:15 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote: [VOTE: approve 3.0M1 release] people.apache is offline again so I can't examine the particular artifacts you produced. However, I have been doing extensive work in using that same svn version of Cayenne for several weeks now without any problems other than CAY-830, which for the last few days appears fixed. Platforms tested: OSX 10.4(JDK 1.5), Windows XP (JDK 1.6), FreeBSD 6.2 (JDK 1.5), Solaris (JDK 1.5) - slightly. No use of the new JPA code. Some use of SQLtemplates. Lots of use of lifecycle callbacks. Lots of use of ROP. +1 (non-PMC) Feeling so confident that we plan to put 3.0M1 into a production release within the next few weeks. Ari Maniatis --> Aristedes Maniatis phone +61 2 9660 9700 PGP fingerprint 08 57 20 4B 80 69 59 E2 A9 BF 2D 48 C2 20 0C C8 PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part
