db-derby-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Apache Wiki <wikidi...@apache.org>
Subject [Db-derby Wiki] Update of "ModuleVersioningGuidelinesReview" by DavidVanCouvering
Date Fri, 23 Sep 2005 17:10:51 GMT
Dear Wiki user,

You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on "Db-derby Wiki" for change notification.

The following page has been changed by DavidVanCouvering:

  ||DJD1||`ProductVersionHolder`||I think PVH is overkill for a version on common code, why
not a simple integer?||Unresolved||'''DJD:''' Don't force commonality just because classes
or concepts seem to be somewhat similar. [[BR]]'''JNB''': PVH is overkill but an int is too
simple. I'd rather see a feature mechanism. We should be concerned about coupling to common
due to the versioning mechanism [[BR]]'''DVC:''' Jeremy created an addendum to this comment
with an email, so I am moving the discussion of this item to ModuleVersioningGuidelinesReviewDjd1||
+ ||TMNK1||Definition of module||I'm not sure what module means in this context ... The word
module was used in paper of derby as next. http://db.apache.org/derby/papers/derby_arch.html#Modules
Are they, which mentioned in the paper and in this discussion, refer same existance ?|| ||'''DVC:'''
You're right, Tomohito, my use of module here is confusing.  I will pick a new term and define
it clearly in the context of this discussion.  How about "shareable component?"||
+ ||TMNK1||What is being shared||What is the code to be shared as module in this discussion
? If it were just java apis, they are shared already ....|| ||'''DVC:''' I'm not sure what
you mean when you say they are shared already.  For example, as it stands today, the internationalization
code and messages in the engine can '''not''' be shared with the network client.  Also, the
DRDA network code can not be shared between server and client.||

View raw message