June 2015 - overlord-issues - Jboss List Archives

[JBoss JIRA] (ARTIF-657) Remove updateContent and deleteContent

by Brett Meyer (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARTIF-657?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Brett Meyer closed ARTIF-657. ----------------------------- > Remove updateContent and deleteContent > -------------------------------------- > > Key: ARTIF-657 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARTIF-657 > Project: Artificer > Issue Type: Bug > Reporter: Brett Meyer > Assignee: Brett Meyer > Fix For: 1.1.0.Final, 1.0.0.Beta1 > > > In the middle of ImpactAnalysisDemo, after all artifacts and relationships have been created, run updateContent on the XSD, using the same .xsd file. The demo will still run successfully. But when finished, pull up the UI and hit one of the Part 'parameter" artifacts, then hit their Relationship tab. It fails, most likely because the relationship wasn't re-created. > Not sure how to handle that. Should the relationships really be re-generated? If so, what happens if, for example, a WSDL Part uses a type that's been modified or removed? -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)

9 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (ARTIF-689) Remove the JCR persistence adapter

by Brett Meyer (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARTIF-689?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Brett Meyer closed ARTIF-689. ----------------------------- > Remove the JCR persistence adapter > ---------------------------------- > > Key: ARTIF-689 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARTIF-689 > Project: Artificer > Issue Type: Task > Reporter: Brett Meyer > Assignee: Brett Meyer > Fix For: 1.1.0.Final, 1.0.0.Beta1 > > > ARTIF-683 switched to a JPA/RDBMS default persistence strategy. Originally, we intended to keep the JCR plugin and continue to maintain it, however: > First and foremost, initial performance tests are looking extremely promising. With the exception of uploads (slower for JPA due to Hibernate Search indexing and complicated INSERTs, as opposed to JCR node creation), everything else is 2-5x faster, including complex queries. > Further, I'm starting to hit certain dependency conflicts between Hibernate and ModeShape that might eventually require a split in Artificer distros. Maintaining both is already becoming a headache. > Is there much of a point in keeping both? The only argument I can think of is if for some reason a user was integrating S-RAMP's JCR storage with their existing, *non-RDBMS* source (Cassandra, etc) through ModeShape/Infinispan. But that's highly unlikely. In my mind, everything else trumps the off-chance for backward compatibility issues. Most users we talk to see JCR purely as an implementation detail. > We will, however, provide a migration strategy. It would simply be code fragments from both adapters, translating to and from the backends. Honestly simple stuff. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)

9 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (ARTIF-311) Add support for comments associated with an Artifact

by Brett Meyer (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARTIF-311?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Brett Meyer closed ARTIF-311. ----------------------------- > Add support for comments associated with an Artifact > ---------------------------------------------------- > > Key: ARTIF-311 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARTIF-311 > Project: Artificer > Issue Type: Feature Request > Reporter: Eric Wittmann > Assignee: Brett Meyer > Fix For: 1.1.0.Final, 1.0.0.Beta1 > > > Add a UI around commenting on artifacts in the repository. Each comment should be its own artifact in the repository with a relationship to the artifact being discussed. The artifact type should be something like: > /ext/ArtifactComment -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)

9 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (ARTIF-669) Document bulk operations through S-RAMP archives

by Brett Meyer (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARTIF-669?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Brett Meyer updated ARTIF-669: ------------------------------ Fix Version/s: (was: 1.1.0.Final) (was: 1.0.0.Beta1) > Document bulk operations through S-RAMP archives > ------------------------------------------------ > > Key: ARTIF-669 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARTIF-669 > Project: Artificer > Issue Type: Task > Reporter: Brett Meyer > Assignee: Brett Meyer > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)

9 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (ARTIF-657) Remove updateContent and deleteContent

by Brett Meyer (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARTIF-657?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Brett Meyer resolved ARTIF-657. ------------------------------- Resolution: Done > Remove updateContent and deleteContent > -------------------------------------- > > Key: ARTIF-657 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARTIF-657 > Project: Artificer > Issue Type: Bug > Reporter: Brett Meyer > Assignee: Brett Meyer > Fix For: 1.1.0.Final, 1.0.0.Beta1 > > > In the middle of ImpactAnalysisDemo, after all artifacts and relationships have been created, run updateContent on the XSD, using the same .xsd file. The demo will still run successfully. But when finished, pull up the UI and hit one of the Part 'parameter" artifacts, then hit their Relationship tab. It fails, most likely because the relationship wasn't re-created. > Not sure how to handle that. Should the relationships really be re-generated? If so, what happens if, for example, a WSDL Part uses a type that's been modified or removed? -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)

9 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (ARTIF-657) Remove updateContent and deleteContent

by Brett Meyer (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARTIF-657?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Brett Meyer updated ARTIF-657: ------------------------------ Summary: Remove updateContent and deleteContent (was: Remove updateContent capability) > Remove updateContent and deleteContent > -------------------------------------- > > Key: ARTIF-657 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARTIF-657 > Project: Artificer > Issue Type: Bug > Reporter: Brett Meyer > Assignee: Brett Meyer > Fix For: 1.1.0.Final, 1.0.0.Beta1 > > > In the middle of ImpactAnalysisDemo, after all artifacts and relationships have been created, run updateContent on the XSD, using the same .xsd file. The demo will still run successfully. But when finished, pull up the UI and hit one of the Part 'parameter" artifacts, then hit their Relationship tab. It fails, most likely because the relationship wasn't re-created. > Not sure how to handle that. Should the relationships really be re-generated? If so, what happens if, for example, a WSDL Part uses a type that's been modified or removed? -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)

9 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (ARTIF-690) Switch to CMT JTA

by Brett Meyer (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARTIF-690?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Brett Meyer updated ARTIF-690: ------------------------------ Fix Version/s: (was: 1.0.0.Beta1) > Switch to CMT JTA > ----------------- > > Key: ARTIF-690 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARTIF-690 > Project: Artificer > Issue Type: Enhancement > Reporter: Brett Meyer > Assignee: Brett Meyer > Fix For: 1.1.0.Final > > > Rather than simply using JDBC transactions at the persistence level, switch to using CMT JTA at the REST/EJB level. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)

9 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (ARTIF-695) Refactor the file storage service

by Brett Meyer (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARTIF-695?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Brett Meyer updated ARTIF-695: ------------------------------ Description: JDBC Blob vs filesystem storage is currently tightly coupled to the JPA plugin. Pull out into a separate contract (strategy registration pattern) (was: JDBC Blob vs filesystem storage is currently tightly coupled to the JPA plugin. Pull out into a separate contract.) > Refactor the file storage service > --------------------------------- > > Key: ARTIF-695 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARTIF-695 > Project: Artificer > Issue Type: Feature Request > Reporter: Brett Meyer > Assignee: Brett Meyer > > JDBC Blob vs filesystem storage is currently tightly coupled to the JPA plugin. Pull out into a separate contract (strategy registration pattern) -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)

9 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (ARTIF-696) Support Ceph for file storage

by Brett Meyer (JIRA)

Brett Meyer created ARTIF-696: --------------------------------- Summary: Support Ceph for file storage Key: ARTIF-696 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARTIF-696 Project: Artificer Issue Type: Sub-task Reporter: Brett Meyer Assignee: Brett Meyer -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)

9 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (ARTIF-697) Support Gluster for file storage

by Brett Meyer (JIRA)

Brett Meyer created ARTIF-697: --------------------------------- Summary: Support Gluster for file storage Key: ARTIF-697 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARTIF-697 Project: Artificer Issue Type: Sub-task Reporter: Brett Meyer Assignee: Brett Meyer -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)

9 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

overlord-issues June 2015