... is fast approaching (2008-02-29)
Is this still a reasonable date, or should we consider delaying it?
Here is the current status (based on what I know):
Feature Status
--
SQL rolesDelayed (disabled)
System privi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... is fast approaching (2008-02-29)
Is this still a reasonable date, or should we consider delaying it?
Here is the current status (based on what I know):
JMX On track
JMX is on track per se, as it has not been defined what exactly will be pa
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
SQL OLAP (row-number)On track
I hope to be able to wrap up the ROW_NUMBER() work over the next couple
of days - but no guarantee as of now.
Thomas
--
Thomas Nielsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Replication On track
The 10.4 replication functionality is done, but I would be a lot more
confident in this new functionality if we had the time to add a lot of
tests. I would prefer that we move code-freeze to end of next week to
add tests, but I'll le
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here is the current status (based on what I know):
Hi Dyre, thanks for all the great work on the 10.4 release!
I think we should remove the OLAP item from the list, as
we haven't made much progress on it and there won't be
much done for OLAP in the 10.4 release. It's p
Bryan Pendleton wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here is the current status (based on what I know):
Hi Dyre, thanks for all the great work on the 10.4 release!
I think we should remove the OLAP item from the list, as
we haven't made much progress on it and there won't be
much done for OLAP in
Jørgen Løland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Replication On track
>
> The 10.4 replication functionality is done, but I would be a lot more
> confident in this new functionality if we had the time to add a lot of
> tests. I would prefer that we move code-fre
Bryan Pendleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Here is the current status (based on what I know):
>
> Hi Dyre, thanks for all the great work on the 10.4 release!
>
> I think we should remove the OLAP item from the list, as
> we haven't made much progress on it and there
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here is the current status (based on what I know):
Feature Status
--
System privilegesOn track
Have you any more information on the state of this? Martin said he
was working on a new patch o
John Embretsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> ... is fast approaching (2008-02-29)
>>
>> Is this still a reasonable date, or should we consider delaying it?
>>
>>
>> Here is the current status (based on what I know):
>
>> JMX On track
>
> JMX is on t
Daniel John Debrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Here is the current status (based on what I know):
>>
>> Feature Status
>> --
>
>> System privilegesOn track
>Have you any more information
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> SQL rolesDelayed (disabled)
To clarify, not disabled on trunk, but will be on the 10.4 branch,
tracked by DERBY-3460.
Dag
Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here is the current status (based on what I know):
Feature Status
--
System privilegesOn track
Have you any more information on the state of this? Martin said he
Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here is the current status (based on what I know):
Feature Status
--
System privilegesOn track
Have you any more information on the state of this? Martin said he
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... is fast approaching (2008-02-29)
Is this still a reasonable date, or should we consider delaying it?
[snip - other work going on]
Client stm cache On track
I'm still working hard to get this done.
In my last run of suites.All with connections obtained
Kristian Waagan wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... is fast approaching (2008-02-29)
Is this still a reasonable date, or should we consider delaying it?
[snip - other work going on]
Client stm cache On track
I'm still working hard to get this done.
In my last run of suites.All wi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Embretsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... is fast approaching (2008-02-29)
Is this still a reasonable date, or should we consider delaying it?
Here is the current status (based on what I know):
JMX On track
JMX is
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... is fast approaching (2008-02-29)
Is this still a reasonable date, or should we consider delaying it?
Unique constraints On track
I have all the patches (3 of them) in jira and there are chances that
they might get commited before 29th but having one more
Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Embretsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... is fast approaching (2008-02-29)
Is this still a reasonable date, or should we consider delaying it?
Here is the current status (based on what I know):
JMX
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> ... is fast approaching (2008-02-29)
>
> Is this still a reasonable date, or should we consider delaying it?
>
>
> Here is the current status (based on what I know):
[...]
> Buffer manager On track
Hi Dyre,
The code for the buffer manager has been in the rep
Rick Hillegas wrote:
Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
I'm trying to add Java security manager checks (DERBY-3462) to the JMX
MBeans so that security is not compromised by the addition of JMX.
While I'm not blocked by DERBY-2109, if I proceed ahead of DERBY-2019
committing code JMX related permis
Anurag Shekhar wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... is fast approaching (2008-02-29)
Is this still a reasonable date, or should we consider delaying it?
Unique constraints On track
I have all the patches (3 of them) in jira and there are chances that
they might get commited before 2
Knut Anders Hatlen wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
... is fast approaching (2008-02-29)
Is this still a reasonable date, or should we consider delaying it?
Here is the current status (based on what I know):
[...]
Buffer manager On track
Hi Dyre,
The code for the buffer manage
Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
Rick Hillegas wrote:
Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
I'm trying to add Java security manager checks (DERBY-3462) to the
JMX MBeans so that security is not compromised by the addition of
JMX. While I'm not blocked by DERBY-2109, if I proceed ahead of
DERBY-2019 comm
Dyre Tjeldvoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Knut Anders Hatlen wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>>
>>> ... is fast approaching (2008-02-29)
>>>
>>> Is this still a reasonable date, or should we consider delaying it?
>>>
>>>
>>> Here is the current status (based on what I know):
>> [...]
>>> Bu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Daniel John Debrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here is the current status (based on what I know):
Feature Status
--
System privilegesOn track
Have you any more in
Martin Zaun wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Daniel John Debrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here is the current status (based on what I know):
Feature Status
--
System privilegesOn track
Hi everybody,
Based on the feedback I have received I have decided to postpone feature
freeze with one week, making Fri 2008-03-07 the new feature
freeze date.
I realize that one week might not be enough to sort out the System
Privileges/JMX security issue, but as long as there is no estimate f
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have decided to postpone feature
freeze with one week, making Fri 2008-03-07 the new feature
freeze date.
Will this also push the release candidate date a week? I hope so. It
would be good to have as much time as possible for bug fixing since we
are accumulating
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I realize that one week might not be enough to sort out the System
Privileges/JMX security issue, but as long as there is no estimate for
how long this could take, it does not seem reasonable to set a feature
freeze date based on this. Hopefully some way to resolve this
Martin Zaun wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I realize that one week might not be enough to sort out the System
Privileges/JMX security issue, but as long as there is no estimate for
how long this could take, it does not seem reasonable to set a feature
freeze date based on this. Hopefully some
Kathey Marsden wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have decided to postpone feature
freeze with one week, making Fri 2008-03-07 the new feature
freeze date.
Will this also push the release candidate date a week? I hope so.
Well, ultimately the community decides by voting to accept or rejec
32 matches
Mail list logo
