Re: [Pharo-users] Update of ConfigurationOfGlorp

2017-10-11 Thread Alistair Grant 
On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 09:50:46PM +0200, Herby Vojk wrote:
> stephan wrote:
> >On 11-10-17 20:33, Herby Vojk wrote:
> >>127 is general, is not sqlite-specific. Fixes any case where primary
> >>key is not primitive and has converter.
> >
> >Should 127 and 129 be merged first, and should current development be
> >promoted to release? And why is 128 missing?
> >
> >Stephan
> >
> >
> 
> 129 is from different author, who skipped upload of its 127 and 128
> (probably intermediates).
> 
> 127 is mine, fixes IMO overoptimized case for DirectMapping which
> unlike its superclass (thus all the other mappings as there is no
> other specialization), stopped converting primary keys to db value in
> fk->pk relationships.

129 is mine.  129 is dated July 2016 while 127 is dated August 2017,
which I guess accounts for why I based 129 on 126.


On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 11:31:17AM +0200, stephan wrote:
> On 06-10-17 17:22, Herby Vojk wrote:
> >Any chance of incorporating fixes 127 / 129?
> 
> Sure, as soon as someone tells me they are safe to
> add. I am just testing Glorp with P3 and Postgres now,
> and don't have the capacity to verify these changes
> other than by just reading the delta.
> 
> Stephan

129 has been available since July 2016 and was promoted to #development
by Pierce in January 2017.

I've been using it without any problems since I submitted it in July
2016.

Cheers,
Alistair

Re: [Pharo-users] Update of ConfigurationOfGlorp

2017-10-11 Thread Herby Vojčík 

stephan wrote:

On 11-10-17 21:50, Herby Vojčík wrote:


129 is from different author, who skipped upload of its 127 and 128
(probably intermediates).

127 is mine, fixes IMO overoptimized case for DirectMapping which
unlike its superclass (thus all the other mappings as there is no
other specialization), stopped converting primary keys to db value in
fk->pk relationships.


Name: ConfigurationOfGlorp-StephanEggermont.62
Author: StephanEggermont
Time: 11 October 2017, 10:00:05.488994 pm
UUID: a7105b9b-ac17-0d00-a62f-44e602acb0bc
Ancestors: ConfigurationOfGlorp-StephanEggermont.61

Patch for stable/release2/2.0.1

Fix error with DirectMapping primary key
not being converted to db type.

In the metarepos, dbxtalk/glorp and dbxtalk/configurations


Thank you very much, sir. :-)

Re: [Pharo-users] Update of ConfigurationOfGlorp

2017-10-11 Thread stephan 

On 11-10-17 21:50, Herby Vojčík wrote:

129 is from different author, who skipped upload of its 127 and 128 
(probably intermediates).


127 is mine, fixes IMO overoptimized case for DirectMapping which unlike 
its superclass (thus all the other mappings as there is no other 
specialization), stopped converting primary keys to db value in fk->pk 
relationships.


Name: ConfigurationOfGlorp-StephanEggermont.62
Author: StephanEggermont
Time: 11 October 2017, 10:00:05.488994 pm
UUID: a7105b9b-ac17-0d00-a62f-44e602acb0bc
Ancestors: ConfigurationOfGlorp-StephanEggermont.61

Patch for stable/release2/2.0.1

Fix error with DirectMapping primary key
not being converted to db type.

In the metarepos, dbxtalk/glorp and dbxtalk/configurations

Re: [Pharo-users] Update of ConfigurationOfGlorp

2017-10-11 Thread Herby Vojčík 

stephan wrote:

On 11-10-17 20:33, Herby Vojčík wrote:
127 is general, is not sqlite-specific. Fixes any case where primary 
key is not primitive and has converter.


Should 127 and 129 be merged first, and should current development be 
promoted to release? And why is 128 missing?


Stephan




129 is from different author, who skipped upload of its 127 and 128 (probably 
intermediates).

127 is mine, fixes IMO overoptimized case for DirectMapping which unlike its 
superclass (thus all the other mappings as there is no other specialization), 
stopped converting primary keys to db value in fk->pk relationships.

Re: [Pharo-users] Update of ConfigurationOfGlorp

2017-10-11 Thread stephan 

On 11-10-17 20:33, Herby Vojčík wrote:
127 is general, is not sqlite-specific. Fixes any case where primary key 
is not primitive and has converter.


Should 127 and 129 be merged first, and should current development be 
promoted to release? And why is 128 missing?


Stephan

Re: [Pharo-users] Update of ConfigurationOfGlorp

2017-10-11 Thread Herby Vojčík 

stephan wrote:

On 06-10-17 17:22, Herby Vojčík wrote:

Any chance of incorporating fixes 127 / 129?


Sure, as soon as someone tells me they are safe to
add. I am just testing Glorp with P3 and Postgres now,
and don't have the capacity to verify these changes
other than by just reading the delta.

Stephan





127 is general, is not sqlite-specific. Fixes any case where primary key is not 
primitive and has converter.

Re: [Pharo-users] Update of ConfigurationOfGlorp

2017-10-11 Thread stephan 

On 06-10-17 17:22, Herby Vojčík wrote:

Any chance of incorporating fixes 127 / 129?


Sure, as soon as someone tells me they are safe to
add. I am just testing Glorp with P3 and Postgres now,
and don't have the capacity to verify these changes
other than by just reading the delta.

Stephan

Re: [Pharo-users] Update of ConfigurationOfGlorp

2017-10-06 Thread Herby Vojčík 

Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:



On 4 Oct 2017, at 17:20, stephan  wrote:

I've added a Pharo 7 version, copied the configurations from DBXTalk/Glorp to 
DBXTalk/Configurations and the metarepos, and
replaced the #'Pharo6.0.x' style names by #'Pharo6.x' style.
Please let me know if that creates problems

Stephan


I tested with the latest ConfigurationOfGlorp-StephanEggermont.61 in Pharo 7 
and that seems OK (not super clean, but OK).

Thx.




Any chance of incorporating fixes 127 / 129?

Herby

Re: [Pharo-users] Update of ConfigurationOfGlorp

2017-10-06 Thread Sven Van Caekenberghe 


> On 4 Oct 2017, at 17:20, stephan  wrote:
> 
> I've added a Pharo 7 version, copied the configurations from DBXTalk/Glorp to 
> DBXTalk/Configurations and the metarepos, and
> replaced the #'Pharo6.0.x' style names by #'Pharo6.x' style.
> Please let me know if that creates problems
> 
> Stephan

I tested with the latest ConfigurationOfGlorp-StephanEggermont.61 in Pharo 7 
and that seems OK (not super clean, but OK).

Thx.

Re: [Pharo-users] Update of ConfigurationOfGlorp

2017-10-04 Thread Stephane Ducasse 
Tx stephan

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 5:20 PM, stephan  wrote:
> I've added a Pharo 7 version, copied the configurations from DBXTalk/Glorp
> to DBXTalk/Configurations and the metarepos, and
> replaced the #'Pharo6.0.x' style names by #'Pharo6.x' style.
> Please let me know if that creates problems
>
> Stephan
>
>