db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeremy Boynes <jboy...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Packaging
Date Mon, 30 May 2005 15:12:08 GMT
Kathey Marsden wrote:
> Jeremy Boynes wrote:
>>Currently we have:
>>* derby.jar (embedded, engine)
>>* derbynet.jar (network server)
>>* derbyclient.jar (network client)
>>I would like to add derbyserver.jar which includes everything from all
>>of these to form a complete standalone server; the client is included
>>so that people don't need to switch classpath if they want to use a
>>remote server and so that stored procedures can access remote servers.
>>If we do this was can also potentially drop derbynet.jar as it is not
>>usable without derby.jar.
>>Any objections?
> This looks good to me at first glance.   derbynet.jar needs to stick
> around for a bit anyway as it is the only thing documented and we would
> need to deprecate it properly. 
> Does this mean ,,,
>   * The unified datasource is just available if you use derbyserver.

No, I would include it in all for consistency. The usage model for each 
package would be:
derbyserver.jar - general purpose, client, server and embedded
derbyclient.jar - thin client only
derby.jar       - embedded only
derbynet.jar    - deprecated, adds server mode to embedded

>   *  The other datasources stick  around for the long term.

Dan wants to go Darwinian on which ones stuck around - release all now 
and see which ones people use.


View raw message