Lobos Future

[Nicolas Buduroi]

Hi everyone, I've not worked on Lobos for some time and just wanted to reassure that this project is not dead by any mean, I'm just quite busy with my job and taking some time to enjoy the summer. Here's my plan in more details than in the roadmap...

Basically I anticipate 4 other minor releases before version 1.0, including the one (migrations) currently in work. After that I'll start working on parsing simple SQL expressions in a database agnostic way to enable the analyzer to extract CHECK and DEFAULT clauses from a database schema. Then we'll need a way to generate (good) Lobos schema definitions from an abstract schema and a way to diff abstract schemas to make it possible to define a database schema declaratively and let Lobos figure out how to manipulate the underlying database schema and handle migrations without user intervention. Finally, I'd like Lobos to emulate transaction support for DDL SQL statement which unfortunatly isn't supported by most RDBMS, this one should (hopefully) be easier than the previous two features.

I hope to be able to do all that before the end of the year, even though that plan is quite ambitious. Afterward I'll be thinking about what to do for version 2.0. For now, the most obvious feature would be adding a ClojureQL-like query language, but we'll see then.

As always, any contributions are welcome.

P.S.: I'm aware the documentation isn't really good or complete, I've done it really fast. I'll try to fix this for the next minor release.

[James Reeves]

On 16 August 2011 17:07, Nicolas Buduroi <nbud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Basically I anticipate 4 other minor releases before version 1.0, including
> the one (migrations) currently in work.

Migrations are the feature I'm waiting for. If you need a hand with
those I might be able to spare some time to help. What's left to do?

- James

[Nicolas Buduroi]

Mostly testing and documentation. What would be nice is a Leiningen plugin to run the migration commands. That's pretty much it, unless I forgot about something.

I'll work a little bit on Lobos tomorrow, I'll certainly rename the 'run' command to 'migrate' and add some tests.

[Nicolas Buduroi]

One thing I forgot about was adding proper warnings when doing migration rollbacks. I might be able to pull this off this week-end along with the tests which I'm half-way through right now. So, I'll may release 0.8 shortly after that.

[Nicolas Buduroi]

While we are at it, I wonder what do you think if I'd make 0.8 into version 1.0 as at this point Lobos will have the most awaited features. In that case I would probably make at least a beta release first. That way the project might get more adoption. I could then make the future releases into version 1.1 to 1.3 as they are more like sugarcoating kind of features.

[J. Pablo Fernández]

I think many open source products suffer of insecurities, and they are forever stuck in versions prior to 1.0 because we are too demanding for what version 1.0 should do like there will never be a 2.0, or a 3.0. I'm fine with you releasing a 1.0. I normally use this schema of versioning for libraries, having a version X.Y.Z:

• Z are bugfixes, so version 1.0.1 has bugfixes over 1.0.0 (1.0.0 is a version or tag, 1.0 is a branch).
  
• Y are features, so version 1.1.0 has new features over 1.0.1 (1.0 is one branch, 1.1 is another branch).
• X are backwards incompatible changes, from version 1.1.5 to version 2.0.0 you should expect changes that require your code to be modified.

In that way is very simple and straightforward when to upgrade and when not to.

[Nicolas Buduroi]

Yes, that's called semantic versioning and I'll try my best to respect it.

2011/8/21 J. Pablo Fernández <pup...@pupeno.com>

[Nicolas Buduroi]

I'm more and more seriously thinking about going to 1.0 directly. I'll make that decision in the coming week. For now I've made another 0.8 snapshot release, containing some minor modifications. The migration namespace now has a good enough test coverage, so the only things left are the lein plugin (already started by Pablo), proper warnings for do-migrations and improving the documentation.

[Nicolas Buduroi]

That's still the plan although I haven't worked on Lobos for a while! If you have any ideas/contributions I'd sure be interested in them.

On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Silas Davis <silas...@gmail.com> wrote:

Sorry for the necropost, but I'm wondering if you still have plans to build a model/db diff-ing and update tool. I'd certainly be interested in contributing to it. Also https://github.com/Yuppiechef/macaron may be related (he/she intends to generalise it away from mysql only)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lobos Library" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lobos-librar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[Ethan Gunderson]

I'm in a similar position. I started using this on a new project, but we'll be heavily using the JSON data type in Postgres. I understand that Lobos is meant to work with several different databases, but is this something that might be added?

On Tuesday, April 30, 2013 6:35:32 PM UTC-5, Josh Lehman wrote:

This is perhaps (and hopefully) a minor request. I've started using Lobos recently with PostgreSQL and really like it -- and I also recently learned about PG's hstore capability. I'd love to be able to use this with Lobos. 

Thanks,

-Josh