You might have a look at my PR's related to MSSQL. They don't cover all your changes, but consider some of them better.

Thank you. Will take a look and can pull my changes. Are your's slated for 3.4?

Mine are for staging. Separate PR for each issue but the demo data and the sqlazure instead of sqlzure.

Consider #3602 better because it is for all databases. The implementation should apply to all and if it does no need to correct the bug for each driver.

#3576 for the no-brainer on sql data. Don't know why it is not merged.

There are some lines commented out. Is this intentional? Why not just remove them instead?

Hello Bakual, agreed they should be removed entirely. I left them in but commented out in case the build failed. They will be removed and re-committed.

Why is this still open after the alpha?

@ArcTechnologyGroupJacobi my guess would be that it hasn't been tested, at least from what I can see.

@betweenbrain Thanks for the quick response! I guess that could be the case, my understanding at JWC was that it should have been already since it has been sitting here for 5 months and is a critical fix to a feature that should be working. Any way you can assist? Thank you!

Well it got conflicts with master at the moment. So these will need to be resolved before it can be merged :)

As George said it needs to be updated to current staging/master as it contains conflicts at the moment.
Also the commented out codelines should be removed.

If someone can test it then, I would be confident enough to merge it based on review and one single test as it only affects MS SQL.

Thanks. Should we download the latest staging repo, make the needed changes and do another pull request or edit this one?

This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/joomla-cms/3751.

Also how do we see what the conflict lines and in which files there are in this pull request? Thank you. Patrick.

Unfortunately GitHub doesn't show that. If you try to merge the staging branch into the branch you created for this pull request, git will show you the merge conflicts.

OK thanks we will try that. Should we do a fresh pull request after modifying our forked branch?

If you update this branch then this pull request updates automatically. If you find it easier to set up a new branch and open a new pull, that's OK too.

Thank you. The install SQL files have been updated and the ARC branch updated, committed and pushed. Please let us know if there are any further issues. The other SQL updates are needed to get a clean install on SQL server.

Still apparently there are conflicts (you can tell by looking at the box just above the comments box :)

@test I installed the patch via com_patchtester and the installation went fine on most cases except for the blog and test sample data. Sample_blog and sample_testing contain sql statements that require the weblinks table which is not defined in the schema. So you get all sort of error messages.

Hint for german users: if you have installed the german version of sql server and the installation process can´t finish then you proably have to change the default language of your database user to english.

Request to somebody with a better overview of all the sqlserver related patches: can you please provide a list with sqlserver patches that needs testing.

We are not having any merge issues locally after pulling the latest Staging commits. Anyone know what the file(s) and line(s) are?

We are going to pull a new Staging, update a new alpha local branch and submit a new pull request. Will that cause an issue getting the minimal needed changes into the new alpha release? Thanks again.

@pmorrisarctg Is there anything left in here now that #5293 has been merged? Or can this be closed?

I'm going to close here as there is no update since 3 Dec 2014 and #5293 has been merged into 3.4.0.

If new information will be provided this can allways be re-open Thanks!