MySQL Lists are EOL. Please join:

List:Commits« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Rafal Somla Date:July 2 2008 2:15pm
Subject:Re: bzr commit into mysql-6.0-backup branch (cbell:2638) Bug#33364,
Bug#35230, WL#4296
View as plain text  
Chuck,

A more constructive version of my last email :)

I propose to exctract implementation of --backupdir option as a separate task 
and push the implementation you prepared now, remembering that we need to think 
more about passing options to backup module and refactor it later.

Then to continue discussion about "Refine backup progress mechanism" task and 
required designs. The task will be moved to next release.

Rafal

Rafal Somla wrote:
> Hi Chuck,
> 
> If I understand you correctly, you are basically proposing to postpone 
> discussing any design related issues now and push the code as it is, 
> because "we are supposed to push it in June".
> 
> But wait a moment - why are we so eager to push it now? The task 
> description is "Refine backup progress mechanism". It is not fixing any 
> serious bug. Compared to the current behaviour it adds a possibility of 
> logging to the files, not only to tables. Is that functionality so 
> important that we can not release 6.0 without it? I don't think so...
> 
> I really think it is not a good idea to push a "refactoring" patch if we 
> already know that we need to refactor it again. Any refactoring should 
> move our code in the direction we want it to be, not the opposite one! I 
> can understand exceptions to that rule for fixing serious bugs or 
> implementing must-have features. But WL#4296 doesn't fall into that 
> category IMO.
> 
> I think we should accept the fact that a task which originally seemed to 
> be simple, turned out to touch many aspects of our system design which 
> we didn't think about before. Instead of hastily push a half-backed 
> solution, we should sit down and think over these aspects of the design. 
> Then we can use this task as a test-drive for the new design solutions. 
> We can afford that, because we have a working logging mechanism which 
> should be good enough for the first release.
> 
> I can agree that all I said above doesn't apply to the --backupdir 
> option because it is a must-have feature. This is yet another good 
> reason to separate this subtask. Then I would be more happy to accept an 
> implementation even if it  is not fully consistent with the design ideas 
> we have, because I'd understand that we must implement --backupdir for 
> 6.0 release. Again, accepting a "temporary" patch for a task which says 
> "Implement --backupdir option" is quite different from accepting such a 
> patch for "Refine something" task.
> 
> Rafal
> 
Thread
bzr commit into mysql-6.0-backup branch (cbell:2638) Bug#33364, Bug#35230,WL#4296Chuck Bell25 Jun
  • Re: bzr commit into mysql-6.0-backup branch (cbell:2638) Bug#33364,Bug#35230, WL#4296Rafal Somla30 Jun
    • RE: bzr commit into mysql-6.0-backup branch (cbell:2638) Bug#33364, Bug#35230, WL#4296Chuck Bell2 Jul
      • Re: bzr commit into mysql-6.0-backup branch (cbell:2638) Bug#33364,Bug#35230, WL#4296Rafal Somla2 Jul
        • Re: bzr commit into mysql-6.0-backup branch (cbell:2638) Bug#33364,Bug#35230, WL#4296Rafal Somla2 Jul
          • RE: bzr commit into mysql-6.0-backup branch (cbell:2638) Bug#33364, Bug#35230, WL#4296Chuck Bell2 Jul
        • RE: bzr commit into mysql-6.0-backup branch (cbell:2638) Bug#33364, Bug#35230, WL#4296Chuck Bell2 Jul
  • Re: bzr commit into mysql-6.0-backup branch (cbell:2638) Bug#33364,Bug#35230, WL#4296Øystein Grøvlen5 Aug
    • RE: bzr commit into mysql-6.0-backup branch (cbell:2638) Bug#33364, Bug#35230, WL#4296Chuck Bell5 Aug
      • Re: bzr commit into mysql-6.0-backup branch (cbell:2638) Bug#33364,Bug#35230, WL#4296Øystein Grøvlen7 Aug
        • RE: bzr commit into mysql-6.0-backup branch (cbell:2638) Bug#33364, Bug#35230, WL#4296Chuck Bell13 Aug