Forum OpenACS Development: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: OACS 6 and beyond

49: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: OACS 6 and beyond (response to 39)

Posted by Don Baccus on 07/30/06 04:37 AM

Oracle support is not optional.

We support Oracle for oacs core 5.2.3. We will support Oracle for oacs core 5.3. When people break Oracle, we've told them to fucking stop it.

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A METADECISION TO DECIDE A POINT IN TIME WHEN WE DROP ORACLE SUPPORT.

A fucking YEAR from now and you insult me and the rest of us who make this project work with just about everything short of having a whore for mother and a Brit for a father.

Nice way to try to convince the community to continue Oracle support.

And, I repeat: fork and The Oracle effort will implode. You really think all these people posting up, screaming, will suddenly step forward and maintain, test, and release new features?

HA HA HA! British humour rocks.

55: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: OACS 6 and beyond (response to 49)

Posted by Simon at TCB on 07/30/06 10:56 AM

'Oracle support is not optional'.. well, at least we seem to agree on something.

Why you wish to take this so personally I don't know. You are not the one ingoring oracle, and I'm sure thats true of others. But *somebody* must be for there to be an issue and for you to be doing the majority of the work.

My frustration was directed at submitters who have not supported oracle sufficiently and who seem to be suggesting that is was someone elses responsibility all along.

Oh and just in case no one picked up on it I meant the core, just the core. I have in no way suggested at ANY point that this applies to application packages. Just the CORE. I did not think this was unreasonable.

But, if you estimate 50% effort for that (and I confess I did not realise the figure was so high) then I can accept that it is simply not practical.

I accept, you are right and I am wrong. I should have stayed out of it, and therefore I hope everyone will have the good sense to dis-regard my inappropriate comments.

Thank you all for you efforts in the past, and my best wishes for the future.

Simon

58: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: OACS 6 and beyond (response to 55)

Posted by Don Baccus on 07/30/06 06:38 PM

"'Oracle support is not optional'.. well, at least we seem to agree on something."

When we talk about a metadecision to decide when we will decide that this will no longer be true, just what do you think this means?

People in this thread are reacting as though we propose to drop Oracle support NOW rather than talking about talking about possibly dropping it a YEAR FROM NOW.

Sheesh.

Now ... you really think that forking a project to support Oracle yourselves would be easier than supporting Oracle within the existing structure of the community?

That's a joke. It would be harder, not easier. Since no one is willing to do it today, why would they be willing to do it tomorrow?

Nick's absolutely right in this.

The 50% estimate is for reasonably stable code where little new development is done. Testing takes as much time for Oracle as it does for PG, you can't take shortcuts and assume that something that works under PG will also work under Oracle. Surely none of you are that naive.