Hi
i work a little on https://github.com/FirebirdSQL/firebird/pull/223.
I know this is not top 1 priority for the team, but i need some decisions from
the team about formatting
1. Style of the name of xml nodes
"JoinType" like MSSQL
"Join-Type" like Postgress
"Join_Type"
other proposition..
On 10-9-2019 10:16, liviuslivius wrote:
Hi
i work a little on https://github.com/FirebirdSQL/firebird/pull/223.
I know this is not top 1 priority for the team, but i need some
decisions from the team about formatting
1. Style of the name of xml nodes
"JoinType" like MSSQL
"Join-Type" like Postg
On 10/09/2019 05:16, liviuslivius wrote:
> Hi
>
> i work a little on https://github.com/FirebirdSQL/firebird/pull/223.
> I know this is not top 1 priority for the team, but i need some
> decisions from the team about formatting
>
> 1. Style of the name of xml nodes
> "JoinType" like MSSQL
> "Jo
>> I prefer JoinType with camelCase attributesOk, name convention two votes.
>> But does it mean that you prefere format with attributes then? Or longer one
>> but without attributes at all?>> And if you use a xml schema, you should
>> publish that schema.It is no real schema. It is now as adver
10.09.2019 13:30, liviuslivius wrote:
But does it mean that you prefere format with attributes then? Or longer one but without
attributes at all?
I'm not a team member but as an user I would prefer format that is understood by
already existing tools.
--
WBR, SD.
Firebird-Devel mailing
:
[Firebird-devel] Plan formatting 10.09.2019 13:30, liviuslivius wrote:> But
does it mean that you prefere format with attributes then? Or longer one but
without > attributes at all? I'm not a team member but as an user I would
prefer format that is understood by already exi
On 10/09/2019 08:30, liviuslivius wrote:
> >> I prefer JoinType with camelCase attributes
>
> Ok, name convention two votes.
>
> But does it mean that you prefere format with attributes then?
With attributes, example: name="name", and not name.
Nodes only for structures.
> Or longer one but wi
>> A schema is a form of documentation and for tooling (classes generation).
>> It's very welcome.
Of course it will be good to have it. I do not negate this. But i suppose it is
not required at start.
>>With attributes, example: name="name", and not name.
>>Nodes only for structures.
I do not
10.09.2019 14:11, liviuslivius wrote:
It is not repleacement of current plan only another plan format.
Current one is default then tools not affected.
Yes. I meant non-Firebird tools like MS Management Studio etc.
--
WBR, SD.
Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at
https://lists.
Ok, i need some final decision from the team.
But i do not know team hierarchy and do not know who have final word here.
If team can answer definitly to:
1. XML plan with or without attributes?
I make it with attributes like MSSQL but i see some disadvantages. It
is not always know de
On 11.09.2019 10:56, liviuslivius wrote:
2. This interface change is allowed or not.
Not
Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
11 matches
Mail list logo
