minutes of ESC call ...

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
15 messages Options
David Ostrovsky-3 David Ostrovsky-3
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

minutes of ESC call ...

On Thu Mar 10 16:40:50 UTC 2016, Michael Meeks wrote:

>* embedded database / firebird mess (Lionel/David O)

[...]

>+ or bundle their binaries (urgh) (Lionel)
>             + deep non-enthusiasm (Norbert, Michael, Bjoern)

But isn't this is exactly what we did for years with Seamonkey based
Mozab driver ... and TBH if /me wouldn't remove it in: [2], we would
probably still ship the prebuilt binaries of this mess for years. So
what is wrong to ship parts of our suite that we can't build? Why it
was the right thing to do, to ship prebuilt Mozab mess for years, but
is wrong thing to do to ship prebuilt FB?

>    + decision needed: (Norbert)
>        + effort to support VS 2015
>        + not eager to turn it off.
>AI:        => regret; disable for now for CI (Norbert)

I have strong impression that there is still some misunderstanding
left: we don't "regret; disable (FB) for now for CI", but we can't
build it any more in next 10 years with our current toolchain at all,
after this patch is merged: [1]. After [1] is merged, say in a couple
of weeks, after we have enough TB and gerrit slaves settled with MSVC
2015, we have exactly two options:

* a) drop FB
* b) ship the prebuilt binaries on windows, built with old and removed
toolchain (and on Mac, because it cannot be built there as well?)

And no, we don't have the option:

* c) fix FB to build on MSVC 2015

because the FB devs rejected support for the new toolchain
(C++14/C++17) for the next 10 years (at least) because they need the
compatibility with WinXP (see the thread from their ML I mentioned in
my previous mail).

In case someone is in doubt, why should we merge [1]: we urgently need
MSVC 2015 to support recent Python 3.5, because Python project dropped
support for MSVC 2013 last year, and we are shipping outdated Python
3.3 in LO 5.1 on Windows because of the outdated compiler toolchain on
this platform. Not to mention better C++ standard C++14/C++17 support.

So, what option should we choose to move forward with merging [1]: a)
or b)?

[1] https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/22588
[2] https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/19560


_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Bjoern Michaelsen Bjoern Michaelsen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: minutes of ESC call ...

Hi,

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 07:28:58PM +0100, David Ostrovsky wrote:
> But isn't this is exactly what we did for years with Seamonkey based
> Mozab driver ... and TBH if /me wouldn't remove it in: [2], we would
> probably still ship the prebuilt binaries of this mess for years. So
> what is wrong to ship parts of our suite that we can't build? Why it
> was the right thing to do, to ship prebuilt Mozab mess for years, but
> is wrong thing to do to ship prebuilt FB?

The LibreOffice project never decided to move from properly building a
dependency to shipping binaries unbuildable on a modern toolchain. I hope it
never will.

> because the FB devs rejected support for the new toolchain
> (C++14/C++17) for the next 10 years (at least) because they need the
> compatibility with WinXP (see the thread from their ML I mentioned in
> my previous mail).

The reason d'etre for FB in LibreOffice at all is that it was a candidate to be
a superior alternative to HSQLDB as a default. Currently however, given the
above, FB hardly seems more attractive than HSQLDB and most certainly not a
worthwhile replacement as default engine, esp. if you take into account the
migration costs to expect.

Anyway, the ESC was where this broader picture has been discussed -- so Id like
not to repeat that discussion here, as the one on the ESC has been quite extensive.

Best,

Bjoern
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Lionel Elie Mamane Lionel Elie Mamane
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: minutes of ESC call ...

In reply to this post by David Ostrovsky-3
On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 07:28:58PM +0100, David Ostrovsky wrote:
> On Thu Mar 10 16:40:50 UTC 2016, Michael Meeks wrote:

>>+ or bundle their binaries (urgh) (Lionel)
>>             + deep non-enthusiasm (Norbert, Michael, Bjoern)

> Why it was the right thing to do, to ship prebuilt Mozab mess for
> years, but is wrong thing to do to ship prebuilt FB?

The point is that it was not the right thing to do to ship the
prebuilt Mozab mess. We made the error once, we don't want to repeat
it.

>>    + decision needed: (Norbert)
>>        + effort to support VS 2015
>>        + not eager to turn it off.
>>AI:        => regret; disable for now for CI (Norbert)

> (...) the FB devs rejected support for the new toolchain
> (C++14/C++17) for the next 10 years (at least) because they need the
> compatibility with WinXP (see the thread from their ML I mentioned
> in my previous mail).

I read that thread and I didn't see a rejection of compatibility with
a new toolchain. I saw a requirement for compatibility with an old
toolchain. If they intend (and do test it at least "for every
release") to:

 * be compatible with MSVC2013
 * build their binaries with MSVC2013
 * AND be compatible with MSVC${LAST_VERSION_WITHIN_A_REASONABLE_TIMEFRAME}

then AFAICS we don't have a problem.

--
Lionel
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
David Ostrovsky-3 David Ostrovsky-3
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: minutes of ESC call ...

Hi Lionel,

On Fri, 2016-03-11 at 06:45 +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 07:28:58PM +0100, David Ostrovsky wrote:
> > On Thu Mar 10 16:40:50 UTC 2016, Michael Meeks wrote:

[...]

> > >    + decision needed: (Norbert)
> > >        + effort to support VS 2015
> > >        + not eager to turn it off.
> > > AI:        => regret; disable for now for CI (Norbert)
>
> > (...) the FB devs rejected support for the new toolchain
> > (C++14/C++17) for the next 10 years (at least) because they need
> > the
> > compatibility with WinXP (see the thread from their ML I mentioned
> > in my previous mail).
>
> I read that thread and I didn't see a rejection of compatibility with
> a new toolchain. I saw a requirement for compatibility with an old
> toolchain. If they intend (and do test it at least "for every
> release") to:
>
>  * be compatible with MSVC2013
>  * build their binaries with MSVC2013
>  * AND be compatible with


Can you point me to this statement in this thread?

> MSVC${LAST_VERSION_WITHIN_A_REASONABLE_TIMEFRAME}

You are missing one subtle delay here:

TIME_NEEDED_THAT_A_HACKER_SHOWS_UP_AND_BUMP_CURRENT_FB_VERSION_TO_THE_R
ECENT_ONE_THAT_SUPPORTS
MSVC${LAST_VERSION_WITHIN_A_REASONABLE_TIMEFRAME}

> then AFAICS we don't have a problem.

I see it differently. Just in case, we dropped MSVC 2013 and the
LAST_VERSION_WITHIN_A_REASONABLE_TIMEFRAME = 10 years,

1/ How is LO 6,7,8,9,10, ... going to be released, after support for
MSVC 2013 was discontinued on master?

I havn't seen the answer to this question in ESC minutes.

With disabled FB? Also disable it in release build on Mac (it's failing
on recent toolchain there too)? Is this our vision for the (default)
embedded database, to be buildable and shipped on only one platform for
years (from major 3): linux? Really?

2/ For all this time, that FB is not buildable on some platform(s), but
still in the tree with --enable-foo=true option we must try very hard
to prevent one thing from happening: that a casual contributor will go
that far, set up build environment, checkout the sources, and the build
would fail hours later with compiler error, because FB cannot be built
on that platform, see the value of the variable
LAST_VERSION_WITHIN_A_REASONABLE_TIMEFRAME above.

Can we try to answer my questions 1/ and 2/ above in next ESC meeting?

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Lionel Elie Mamane Lionel Elie Mamane
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: minutes of ESC call ...

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 07:30:54AM +0100, David Ostrovsky wrote:

> On Fri, 2016-03-11 at 06:45 +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 07:28:58PM +0100, David Ostrovsky wrote:
> > > On Thu Mar 10 16:40:50 UTC 2016, Michael Meeks wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > >    + decision needed: (Norbert)
> > > >        + effort to support VS 2015
> > > >        + not eager to turn it off.
> > > > AI:        => regret; disable for now for CI (Norbert)
> >
> > > (...) the FB devs rejected support for the new toolchain
> > > (C++14/C++17) for the next 10 years (at least) because they need
> > > the
> > > compatibility with WinXP (see the thread from their ML I mentioned
> > > in my previous mail).
> >
> > I read that thread and I didn't see a rejection of compatibility with
> > a new toolchain. I saw a requirement for compatibility with an old
> > toolchain. If they intend (and do test it at least "for every
> > release") to:
> >
> >  * be compatible with MSVC2013
> >  * build their binaries with MSVC2013
> >  * AND be compatible with

> Can you point me to this statement in this thread?

That was within the scope of an "if". We don't know if they intend
this to be the case. We need to clarify this. I will ask them.

>> MSVC${LAST_VERSION_WITHIN_A_REASONABLE_TIMEFRAME}

> You are missing one subtle delay here:

> TIME_NEEDED_THAT_A_HACKER_SHOWS_UP_AND_BUMP_CURRENT_FB_VERSION_TO_THE_R
> ECENT_ONE_THAT_SUPPORTS
> MSVC${LAST_VERSION_WITHIN_A_REASONABLE_TIMEFRAME}

This is true for any external written in any compiled (or even
interpreted) language that doesn't have perfect ascending
compatibility (so any language?)...

>> then AFAICS we don't have a problem.

> I see it differently. Just in case, we dropped MSVC 2013 and the
> LAST_VERSION_WITHIN_A_REASONABLE_TIMEFRAME = 10 years,

No, more like 1 year.

> 1/ How is LO 6,7,8,9,10, ... going to be released, after support for
> MSVC 2013 was discontinued on master?

?

> With disabled FB? Also disable it in release build on Mac (it's failing
> on recent toolchain there too)? Is this our vision for the (default)
> embedded database, to be buildable and shipped on only one platform for
> years (from major 3): linux? Really?

No, that can work only if Firebird compiles with an MSVC, clang
(and gcc I suppose) that suits us.


> 2/ For all this time, that FB is not buildable on some platform(s),
> but still in the tree

We will not let it like that for the timeframe that you mention.

> Can we try to answer my questions 1/ and 2/ above in next ESC
> meeting?

If/when we have enough new information that a discussion at the ESC
makes sense, would you like to participate at that ESC meeting?

--
Lionel
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
David Ostrovsky-3 David Ostrovsky-3
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: minutes of ESC call ...

Hi Lionel,

adding Christian to the CC.

On Fri, 2016-03-11 at 07:57 +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 07:30:54AM +0100, David Ostrovsky wrote:
> > On Fri, 2016-03-11 at 06:45 +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 07:28:58PM +0100, David Ostrovsky wrote:
> > > > On Thu Mar 10 16:40:50 UTC 2016, Michael Meeks wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > >    + decision needed: (Norbert)
> > > > >        + effort to support VS 2015
> > > > >        + not eager to turn it off.
> > > > > AI:        => regret; disable for now for CI (Norbert)
> > >
> > > > (...) the FB devs rejected support for the new toolchain
> > > > (C++14/C++17) for the next 10 years (at least) because they
> > > > need
> > > > the
> > > > compatibility with WinXP (see the thread from their ML I
> > > > mentioned
> > > > in my previous mail).
> > >

[...]

> > > then AFAICS we don't have a problem.
>
> > I see it differently. Just in case, we dropped MSVC 2013 and the
> > LAST_VERSION_WITHIN_A_REASONABLE_TIMEFRAME = 10 years,
>
> No, more like 1 year.
>
> > 1/ How is LO 6,7,8,9,10, ... going to be released, after support
> > for
> > MSVC 2013 was discontinued on master?
>
> ?

I've just approved this change: [1] and after confirmtaion from Norbert
that our CI infra was extended to support MSVC 2015, I will merge it.

How is the next LibreOffice release (5.2?) supposed to be built after
this change was merged, when FB cannot be built on MSVC 2015 toolchain?
And other releases during this 1 year (too optimistic assumption for
me, but still)?

@Christian, any comments on that from your side?

> > 2/ For all this time, that FB is not buildable on some platform(s),
> > but still in the tree
>
> We will not let it like that for the timeframe that you mention.
>
> > Can we try to answer my questions 1/ and 2/ above in next ESC
> > meeting?
>
> If/when we have enough new information that a discussion at the ESC
> makes sense, would you like to participate at that ESC meeting?
>

I will attend Gerrit developer Hackathon in Berlin next week, but I can
try to join you.

* [1] https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/22588

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Lionel Elie Mamane Lionel Elie Mamane
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: minutes of ESC call ...

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 08:29:43AM +0100, David Ostrovsky wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-03-11 at 07:57 +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 07:30:54AM +0100, David Ostrovsky wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2016-03-11 at 06:45 +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 07:28:58PM +0100, David Ostrovsky wrote:
>>>>> On Thu Mar 10 16:40:50 UTC 2016, Michael Meeks wrote:

>>>>>>    + decision needed: (Norbert)
>>>>>>        + effort to support VS 2015
>>>>>>        + not eager to turn it off.
>>>>>> AI:        => regret; disable for now for CI (Norbert)

>>>>> (...) the FB devs rejected support for the new toolchain
>>>>> (C++14/C++17) for the next 10 years (at least) because they need
>>>>> the compatibility with WinXP (see the thread from their ML I
>>>>> mentioned in my previous mail).

> [...]

>>>> then AFAICS we don't have a problem.

>>> I see it differently. Just in case, we dropped MSVC 2013 and the
>>> LAST_VERSION_WITHIN_A_REASONABLE_TIMEFRAME = 10 years,

>> No, more like 1 year.

>>> 1/ How is LO 6,7,8,9,10, ... going to be released, after support
>>> for MSVC 2013 was discontinued on master?

>> ?

> How is the next LibreOffice release (5.2?) supposed to be built
> after this change was merged, when FB cannot be built on MSVC 2015
> toolchain?

We are not there yet. Obviously, if we need to switch to MSVC2015 for
5.2 and not 5.3 and FB is not fixed by then, then, yes, without FB.

Now that I look at the planning, that's indeed a two-month timeframe
(until the feature freeze). <sigh>

> And other releases during this 1 year (too optimistic assumption for
> me, but still)?

We are not talking of the same period. I was saying that if FB
intends, in the future on an ongoing basis, to be compatible with the
latest MSVC release within one year, then that will probably be
acceptable to us. I WILL ASK THEM WHAT THEIR INTENTIONS ARE. Until we
have their opinion, WE HAVE NO BASE TO DISCUSS ON.

--
Lionel
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Norbert Thiebaud Norbert Thiebaud
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: minutes of ESC call ...

In reply to this post by David Ostrovsky-3
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 1:29 AM, David Ostrovsky <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I've just approved this change: [1] and after confirmtaion from Norbert
> that our CI infra was extended to support MSVC 2015, I will merge it.

in another related thread vmiklos pointed to a residual problem with
32 bits on vs2015 only setup.
something about missing dotnet stuff it seems... I'm not sure.. but
that is prolly something
that need explaining/addressing before we switch...


Norbert
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
David Ostrovsky-3 David Ostrovsky-3
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: minutes of ESC call ...

Hi,

On Fri, 2016-03-11 at 11:00 -0600, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 1:29 AM, David Ostrovsky <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > I've just approved this change: [1] and after confirmtaion from
> > Norbert
> > that our CI infra was extended to support MSVC 2015, I will merge
> > it.
>
> in another related thread vmiklos pointed to a residual problem with
> 32 bits on vs2015 only setup.
> something about missing dotnet stuff it seems... I'm not sure.. but
> that is prolly something
> that need explaining/addressing before we switch...

Sorry, fixed in: [1]. I added the TODO there, and asked shm_get to drop
support for Windows 32 bit platform. After he said no, /me forgot to
test 32bit build on 32bit platform. I only tested it on 64bit platform.

Unrelated to this thread, but while setting new 32bit VM I tried

  LODE on Chocolate

combination, and it was v. impressive. Thanks to all (mostly shm_get)
who made the setup on this platform so ... painless. I extended the
Wiki here: [2].

* [1] https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/23159
* [2] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/lode#Preparing_Wi
ndows_with_Chocolate

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Miklos Vajna-4 Miklos Vajna-4
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: minutes of ESC call ...

Hi David,

On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 01:10:58AM +0100, David Ostrovsky <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Sorry, fixed in: [1].

Thanks, now autogen.sh finishes without an error for me as well. :-)

Regards,

Miklos

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

signature.asc (188 bytes) Download Attachment
Christian Lohmaier-3 Christian Lohmaier-3
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: minutes of ESC call ...

In reply to this post by David Ostrovsky-3
Hi David, *,

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 8:29 AM, David Ostrovsky <[hidden email]> wrote:>
> On Fri, 2016-03-11 at 07:57 +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 07:30:54AM +0100, David Ostrovsky wrote:
>> >
>> > [...]
>
> I've just approved this change: [1]

[→ dropping VS2013 suppot]

> and after confirmtaion from Norbert
> that our CI infra was extended to support MSVC 2015, I will merge it.

The important part is *AFTER* confirmation. You're again jumping ahead
of events.
Unless 2015 is proven to work there's no point dropping support for 2013.

> How is the next LibreOffice release (5.2?) supposed to be built after
> this change was merged, when FB cannot be built on MSVC 2015 toolchain?
> And other releases during this 1 year (too optimistic assumption for
> me, but still)?
>
> @Christian, any comments on that from your side?

that whole FireDB situation sucks, and I'd rather  bundle hsqldb with
every odb file.

If firedb cannot be built, then we should not ship it.
I'd rather update hsqldb, even if it is the evil, evil java and have
two versions of hsqldb than shipping a "prebuilt" or whatever version
of firedb.

But again: you're jumping from conclusions, see Lionel's mails..

ciao
Christian
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Lionel Elie Mamane Lionel Elie Mamane
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

embedded database [was: minutes of ESC call ...]

On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 01:05:10PM +0100, Christian Lohmaier wrote:

> that whole FireDB situation sucks, and I'd rather bundle hsqldb with
> every odb file.

You mean put the full .jar of HSQLDB in each (embedded HSQLDB) ODB
file?

> I'd rather update hsqldb, even if it is the evil, evil java and have
> two versions of hsqldb (...)

Generalising what you wrote (and was removed from quotation by me) to
the point that this is not an answer to you, but a general remark, I
wish to stress that in my eyes things are in theory not mutually
exclusive. We can, if we have the volunteer manpower to put it in
place AND MAINTAIN IT FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE (that's a big if...),
embed all of:

 - HSQLDB 1.8 (for backwards compatibility)
 - Firebird 3
 - HSQLDB 2.x
 - H2
 - whatever some other volunteer puts and maintains in LibreOffice.

The choice of which one is the default, which one we use
non-unpaid-volunteer manpower (such as GSoC) for, etc is one that can
be had, but should not be confused with "do we want to embed XXX".

So: if anybody wants to upgrade our embedded HSQLDB, or embed H2 or
..., FEEL FREE, INDEPENDENTLY OF THIS DISCUSSION. I will take
patches.

--
Lionel
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Lionel Elie Mamane Lionel Elie Mamane
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

firebird on MSVC2015 [was: minutes of ESC call ...]

In reply to this post by Lionel Elie Mamane
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 06:45:47AM +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 07:28:58PM +0100, David Ostrovsky wrote:
>> On Thu Mar 10 16:40:50 UTC 2016, Michael Meeks wrote:

>>>    + decision needed: (Norbert)
>>>        + effort to support VS 2015
>>>        + not eager to turn it off.
>>>AI:        => regret; disable for now for CI (Norbert)

>> (...) the FB devs rejected support for the new toolchain
>> (C++14/C++17) for the next 10 years (at least) because they need the
>> compatibility with WinXP (see the thread from their ML I mentioned
>> in my previous mail).

> I read that thread and I didn't see a rejection of compatibility with
> a new toolchain. I saw a requirement for compatibility with an old
> toolchain. If they intend (and do test it at least "for every
> release") to:

>  * be compatible with MSVC2013
>  * build their binaries with MSVC2013
>  * AND be compatible with MSVC${LAST_VERSION_WITHIN_A_REASONABLE_TIMEFRAME}

> then AFAICS we don't have a problem.

So, I got a straight answer from them:

1) There is an unofficial variant of Firebird 2.5 at
   https://github.com/dmitry-lipetsk/firebird/tree/B2_5_Release
   which compiles fine with MSVC2015, and which seem to be tested; the
   README.md says:

   Binaries, created from these sources, are used in load and stress
   tests of IBProvider (OLE DB Provider for Firebird and InterBase).

2) I quote:

>> Short version: will Firebird (2.5? 3? latest?) in general be kept
>> compatible with the latest major compilers (within a reasonable time
>> of their release) for each platform for the foreseeable future?

> Yes. Just don't expect it to happen immediately.

> v2.5 is officially built using VC2005 but also supports VC2008 and
> VC2010 (used by some our developers).
> v3.0 is officially built using VC2010 but also supports
> VC2012/2013.
> v4.0 will be officially built using VC2013.

> I don't want to promise anything for v2.5 which is likely to be
> discontinued in two years, but I see no reason why v3 and v4 cannot
> be compiled using VC2015 or whatever later. Obviously, it's not our
> top priority. We just need someone to setup VC2015 and give it a
> try.

So one way forward would be to switch to Firebird 3.0 (which is at RC2
level), anticipating MSVC2015 compatibility "soon" (and enable it on
Windows when the compatibility arrives); looks like if we make the
patches ourselves, they would gladly accepted them.

We could also use the above "unofficial" variant of Firebird 2.5, but
my personal taste would be towards the future (version 3) rather than
staying with 2.5.

My plan is to try to invest GSoC resources into the above. No veto?

--
Lionel
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Bjoern Michaelsen Bjoern Michaelsen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: embedded database [was: minutes of ESC call ...]

In reply to this post by Lionel Elie Mamane
Hi,

On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 03:48:01PM +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> So: if anybody wants to upgrade our embedded HSQLDB, or embed H2 or
> ..., FEEL FREE, INDEPENDENTLY OF THIS DISCUSSION. I will take
> patches.

Note though, that LibreOffice has a reputation and claim that it can pretty
much open ~anything. So even _iff_ we would start embedding DB-Engines in odbs,
there would still be lots of HSQLDB odbs in the wild, that do not have anything
embedded -- and users likely will expect us to be able to open those for a looong
time, even after we gave them much warning ahead of time.

I see none of the proposals so far (even _iff_ we had the manpower) helping us
to get rid of HSSQLDB. Without ever having had a look at the details: to really
get rid of HSSQLDB (Java) likely requires implementing a HSQLDB file reader
(not a full DB engine) in C++, which we can use to import iold data to whatever
fancy new engine someone comes up with.

Best,

Bjoern

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
marius adrian popa marius adrian popa
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: firebird on MSVC2015 [was: minutes of ESC call ...]

In reply to this post by Lionel Elie Mamane
Lionel Elie Mamane <lionel <at> mamane.lu> writes:


>
> > v2.5 is officially built using VC2005 but also supports VC2008 and
> > VC2010 (used by some our developers).
> > v3.0 is officially built using VC2010 but also supports
> > VC2012/2013.
> > v4.0 will be officially built using VC2013.
>
> > I don't want to promise anything for v2.5 which is likely to be
> > discontinued in two years, but I see no reason why v3 and v4 cannot
> > be compiled using VC2015 or whatever later. Obviously, it's not our
> > top priority. We just need someone to setup VC2015 and give it a
> > try.
>
> So one way forward would be to switch to Firebird 3.0 (which is at RC2
> level), anticipating MSVC2015 compatibility "soon" (and enable it on
> Windows when the compatibility arrives); looks like if we make the
> patches ourselves, they would gladly accepted them.
>
> We could also use the above "unofficial" variant of Firebird 2.5, but
> my personal taste would be towards the future (version 3) rather than
> staying with 2.5.
>
> My plan is to try to invest GSoC resources into the above. No veto?
>

We also accept now github pull requests so it will be easier in the future
to integrate with new IDE versions or compilers

https://github.com/FirebirdSQL/firebird

There are a few commits already with VC14 support
https://github.com/FirebirdSQL/firebird/commit/21b76bf44fd8c5ef3526fd77d53c6
b43d7594fa0
https://github.com/FirebirdSQL/firebird/commit/9ae426a75778ddb46273012f8aecb
2018aa0d087


_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice