[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: DataDirect Priorities of Remaining Issues
I don’t have anything to
add to these issues, I’ve listed them because we think they’re
important for SDO 3: ·
SDO-96: Deprecate
INSTANCE variables and improve bootstrapping - Now that we have the
SDO class, and INSTANCE is deprecated, what needs to be done? ·
SDO-123: Relax
containment requirements - Now that we have OrphanHolders and projection,
what needs to be done. ·
SDO-146: Move
section on HelperContext earlier in chapter 4 – I did this as part of the
general document clean-up when I was adding the RFC2119 wording. Does
something else need to be done? ·
SDO-147: Make type
conversions language-independent – Type conversions are described in the
core spec, in (I think) a language neutral manner. And I agree they can be closed
if everyone agrees. For SDO-33 (and SDO-44), I remember we had this discussion
but I couldn’t get/find the resolution of the issue. From: Barack, Ron [mailto:ron.barack@sap.com]
Hi Francois, Some of the items on your
priorities are issues that I thought were duplicates. Can you describe
what needs to be done for the following issues: SDO-33: Change Summary does not
track move - I thought that this was resolved when we decided moving
objects between containers would be tracked as a move, rather than a
create/delete. SDO-96: Deprecate INSTANCE
variables and improve bootstrapping - Now that we have the SDO
class, and INSTANCE is deprecated, what needs to be done? SDO-123: Relax containment
requirements - Now that we have OrphanHolders and projection, what needs
to be done. SDO-146: Move section on
HelperContext earlier in chapter 4 – I did this as part of the general
document clean-up when I was adding the RFC2119 wording. Does something
else need to be done? SDO-147: Make type conversions
language-independent – Type conversions are described in the core spec,
in (I think) a language neutral manner. Best Regards, Ron From: François Huaulmé [mailto:Francois.Huaulme@datadirect.com]
Hi, We have also reviewed the remaining open issues in the SDO
3. Please find attached to this mail our priorities of the remaining issues. We have also seen some opened C++ issues: C++ is an
interesting use case for DataDirect and I know Christophe and Brian exchanged
few mails about the C++ spec. I think the SDO C++ specification should be
re-written because of the core/language-specific distinction that has been
introduced. But I’m not sure this has been discussed lately. Thanks,
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]