Status of DBIx::Class

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Status of DBIx::Class

Andrew Gregory
What is the current status of DBIx::Class?  It looks like development
has all but stopped since last October.[1]  Is somebody actively
maintaining DBIx::Class somewhere else?  I sent an email to this list
two months ago regarding a bug that causes incorrect data to be
inserted with no response from this list.[2]  Is there a better way
for me to work toward getting the bug fixed?

[1]: https://github.com/dbsrgits/dbix-class/graphs/commit-activity
[2]: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/pipermail/dbix-class/2017-May/012630.html

apg

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: (Unofficial) Status of DBIx::Class

Peter Rabbitson-2
Adding my personal 2c for the sake of concerned end-users. Please note
that I do not have knowledge of what the current management is doing or
planning to do.


On 07/15/2017 06:03 PM, Andrew Gregory wrote:

> What is the current status of DBIx::Class?  It looks like development
> has all but stopped since last October.[1]  Is somebody actively
> maintaining DBIx::Class somewhere else?  I sent an email to this list
> two months ago regarding a bug that causes incorrect data to be
> inserted with no response from this list.[2]  Is there a better way
> for me to work toward getting the bug fixed?
>
> [1]: https://github.com/dbsrgits/dbix-class/graphs/commit-activity
> [2]: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/pipermail/dbix-class/2017-May/012630.html
>

First of all - there is at least one person ( myself ) doing basic
maintenance, albeit without yet publishing the changes in a
widely-consumable form. As indicated back in [3] my plan was to resume
public work once notable development takes place within the "official
fork". Due to this not happening in a timely manner, I minimized my work
to small bugfixes and clarifications to problems raised on this list
and/or the #dbix-class channel. All interactions ( including the one
with the OP back in May ) were done in private, as to give an
opportunity to the newly formed team to forge their own path forward.

To this date there haven't been any show-stopper issues that were
brought to my attention, so the wider userbase is not missing much more
than what is already currently mothballed in the official repository.

Nevertheless, recently I raised a set of questions to the PAUSE
administrators [4], which are instrumental for me to continue work under
the preexisting model. The policy addressing these is afaik in the final
stages of approval. From my side the plan is to have some sort of
DBIx::Class::Boring distribution appear on CPAN by the end of Q3 2017,
pending resolution of the policy issues.

Apologies for not having more information to share at present.

Cheers

[3] http://lists.scsys.co.uk/pipermail/dbix-class/2016-December/012479.html
[4] https://twitter.com/ribasushi/status/884019305876262912

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Status of DBIx::Class

Matt S Trout-2
In reply to this post by Andrew Gregory
On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 12:03:30PM -0400, Andrew Gregory wrote:
> What is the current status of DBIx::Class?  It looks like development
> has all but stopped since last October.[1]  Is somebody actively
> maintaining DBIx::Class somewhere else?  I sent an email to this list
> two months ago regarding a bug that causes incorrect data to be
> inserted with no response from this list.[2]  Is there a better way
> for me to work toward getting the bug fixed?

Sorry about the silence; my previous attempt to put together a plan to move
forwards resulted in exactly zero response from users on here and Peter
calling me Sean Spicer on twitter, which, let's say, didn't really
incentivise me to prioritise DBIC as a project.

I'm currently working towards understanding the impact of the various
backwards incompatible changes riba made on master with a view to putting
out a dev release and a write up so that we can start figuring out the
impact on production codebases and seeing if we need additional mitigations
before shipping a production release.

My apologies for the delay; I feel like I blinked and suddenly it was summer.

--
Matt S Trout - Shadowcat Systems - Perl consulting with a commit bit and a clue

http://shadowcat.co.uk/blog/matt-s-trout/   http://twitter.com/shadowcat_mst/

Email me now on mst (at) shadowcat.co.uk and let's chat about how our CPAN
commercial support, training and consultancy packages could help your team.

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Status of DBIx::Class

Peter Rabbitson-2
sigh... why did I even say anything...

On 07/17/2017 12:33 PM, Matt S Trout wrote:
> Peter calling me Sean Spicer on twitter

Please either provide a link, or retract this latest bit in a string of
blatant lies

> I'm currently working towards understanding the impact of the various
> backwards incompatible changes riba made on master

There are to the best of my knowledge *no incompatible changes* compared
to 0.082840 currently on CPAN. If there are - these are bugs, and I will
fix them as promised back in October.

Again - I request you put up constructive criticism, or retract the
vague insinuations of my making the codebase somehow worse for *any*
end-user.

If above is too much effort, trash the unreleased changes and restart
dev from the last tag, it's not hard.

Your current trajectory of seemingly planning on using my work as-is,
yet wrapping it in a stream of FUD is neither here nor there.

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Status of DBIx::Class

Matt S Trout-2
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 12:46:47PM +0200, Peter Rabbitson wrote:
> On 07/17/2017 12:33 PM, Matt S Trout wrote:
> >Peter calling me Sean Spicer on twitter
>
> Please either provide a link, or retract this latest bit in a string
> of blatant lies

Perhaps I misunderstood your intent when you used #alternativefacts to
describe my comments on-list, but given it was a small number of days after
Mr. Spicer coined that phrase during a press briefing I hope my reading
of it is at least understandable.
 
> >I'm currently working towards understanding the impact of the various
> >backwards incompatible changes riba made on master
>
> There are to the best of my knowledge *no incompatible changes*
> compared to 0.082840 currently on CPAN. If there are - these are
> bugs, and I will fix them as promised back in October.

Quoth the documentation of DBIx::Class::Schema::SanityChecker -

=begin quote

Starting with C<v0.082900> DBIC is much more aggressive in calling the
underlying non-sugar methods directly, which in turn means that almost all
user-side overrides of sugar methods are never going to be invoked. These
situations are now reliably detected and reported individually (you may
end up with a lot of output on C<STDERR> due to this).

Note: B<ANY AND ALL ISSUES> reported by this check B<*MUST*> be resolved
before upgrading DBIC in production. Malfunctioning business logic and/or
B<SEVERE DATA LOSS> may result otherwise.

=end quote

The refactorings that led to DBIC both requiring this warning and the system
for marking resultsource overrides are absolutely fantastic technical work,
and mostly I'm just disappointed it didn't occur to me to do something
similar a decade ago.

However I'm still uncertain of the impact; hopefully the dev release plus
write-up will give users - and thus the core team - sufficient information
to be confident that the benefits outweigh the costs.

I don't regard being cautious about a release that, as your documentation
says, may cause "SEVERE DATA LOSS", to be FUD, but merely part of my duty
of care to the user base. You're welcome to hold a different opinion.

--
Matt S Trout - Shadowcat Systems - Perl consulting with a commit bit and a clue

http://shadowcat.co.uk/blog/matt-s-trout/   http://twitter.com/shadowcat_mst/

Email me now on mst (at) shadowcat.co.uk and let's chat about how our CPAN
commercial support, training and consultancy packages could help your team.

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Status of DBIx::Class

Peter Rabbitson-2
On 07/17/2017 01:20 PM, Matt S Trout wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 12:46:47PM +0200, Peter Rabbitson wrote:
>> On 07/17/2017 12:33 PM, Matt S Trout wrote:
>>> I'm currently working towards understanding the impact of the various
>>> backwards incompatible changes riba made on master
>>
>> There are to the best of my knowledge *no incompatible changes*
>> compared to 0.082840 currently on CPAN. If there are - these are
>> bugs, and I will fix them as promised back in October.
>
> Quoth the documentation of DBIx::Class::Schema::SanityChecker -
>
> =begin quote
>
> Starting with C<v0.082900> DBIC is much more aggressive in calling the
> underlying non-sugar methods directly, which in turn means that almost all
> user-side overrides of sugar methods are never going to be invoked. These
> situations are now reliably detected and reported individually (you may
> end up with a lot of output on C<STDERR> due to this).
>
> Note: B<ANY AND ALL ISSUES> reported by this check B<*MUST*> be resolved
> before upgrading DBIC in production. Malfunctioning business logic and/or
> B<SEVERE DATA LOSS> may result otherwise.
>
> =end quote

This is a blanket documentation placeholder, aimed at
usually-warning-ignoring audience. As such it is deliberately
over-the-top, which is hardly unheard-of practice. ( In reality almost
all the issues took place in 0.082801, and have already been affecting
codebases for nearly 3 years, which I explicitly detail in my writeups.
What *is* new in master is the warning system itself ).

Please, for the love of sanity, assure the list your technical concerns
are based on something more than skimming the POD? For instance I would
expect a maintainer to at least have examined the changesets made in t/
and xt/ and to read and understand the known downstream effects detailed
in the following commit messages:
https://github.com/dbsrgits/dbix-class/commit/12e7015a
https://github.com/dbsrgits/dbix-class/commit/dc7d8991

>
> I don't regard being cautious

You are not "being cautious". You are being deliberately vague and
misleading (or worse). Your position requires you to do better.

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Status of DBIx::Class

Matt S Trout-2
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 01:43:04PM +0200, Peter Rabbitson wrote:
> Please, for the love of sanity, assure the list your technical
> concerns are based on something more than skimming the POD?

Of course they are.

> >I don't regard being cautious
>
> You are not "being cautious". You are being deliberately vague and
> misleading (or worse). Your position requires you to do better.

Your opinion is noted.

--
Matt S Trout - Shadowcat Systems - Perl consulting with a commit bit and a clue

http://shadowcat.co.uk/blog/matt-s-trout/   http://twitter.com/shadowcat_mst/

Email me now on mst (at) shadowcat.co.uk and let's chat about how our CPAN
commercial support, training and consultancy packages could help your team.

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Loading...