Scala 2.11 support or is 0.9.6 ready for prime-time?

[alboko]

Hello,

What is the current status of Scala 2.11 support in Squeryl? Sorry for my ignorance, but I don't see any recent posts/updates on this topic.

Is 0.9.6 version available? Is it stable enough to use in production environment?

Thanks for any info.

Alex

[Kenji Yoshida]

Hi,

I'm using squeryl 0.9.5-7 with Scala 2.11 in production, and there are no problems in particular.

[David Whittaker]

Hi Alex,

The 0.9.6 series does support Scala 2.11, but there are no plans to backport 2.11 support to 0.9.5. I consider 0.9.6 to be production ready and my organization has been using it in production projects, both internally and for clients, for quite a while. 0.9.6 really should have been officially released already, and will probably go out as 1.0. The holdups to that have been:

• We’d like to revamp the site and documentation before release.
• I had been handling the continuous integration and after my organization did a recent server migration I haven’t found the time to get it up again.

The committers are heavy Squeryl users, so if any technical issues crop up we make sure to find the time to address them. There are only about 4 of us who are active on the project though, and most of us have been busier than normal at our day jobs. If anyone in the community is interested in stepping up to help us address the process stuff like documentation and continuous integration, it would be greatly appreciated.

​

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Squeryl" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to squeryl+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[alboko]

Hi David,

Thanks for the good news and for the great library!

Squeryl support for Scala 2.11 was the last thing left that prevented us from switching to Scala 2.11 (we currently on 0.9.5-7 in production).

Would you recommend using 0.9.7 (as Kenji recommends) or should we stick with 0.9.6-RC3 until 1.0 release?

Best regards,

Alex

[Adam]

This is not true, I'm using 0.9.5-7 with scala 2.11 and have been for some time now.  Can't move to 9.6 as views were (accidentally?) removed and we rely on them.

http://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.squeryl/squeryl_2.11/0.9.5-7

~Adam~

[David Whittaker]

On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 2:00 PM, Adam <les...@gmail.com> wrote:

This is not true, I'm using 0.9.5-7 with scala 2.11 and have been for some time now.  Can't move to 9.6 as views were (accidentally?) removed and we rely on them.

....and further proof that it's been tough to focus on Squeryl lately around other things.  I should have remembered that since I'm the one who published it :)  

As far as which version to use, unless you have a legitimate issue with 0.9.6, like Adam does, I'd strongly recommend using 0.9.6.  All of the committers are using 0.9.6 in production and it's been getting a lot more attention than the 0.9.5 branch for some time now.

Adam, it seems like we need to get that fixed up for you before a 1.0 release.  Can you remind me what the issue is?

Actually, anyone else with issues with 0.9.6, take this as somewhat of a last call.  If there is anything you'd really like to see fixed before it's officially released and 0.9.5 is shelved for good, please let us know now.

[Adam]

David, here is the thread discussing views: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/squeryl/iXr4uydT4lk

~Adam~

[David Whittaker]

Thanks Adam.

The Assembla issues are all outdated, so I've re-enabled GH issues and added one to track this: https://github.com/squeryl/squeryl/issues/192