db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel John Debrunner <...@debrunners.com>
Subject Re: Packaging
Date Mon, 30 May 2005 23:46:22 GMT
Jeremy Boynes wrote:
> 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.

Are we saying that there is no need for anyone to ship embedded +
network server only, as can be done today (derbynet + derby)?
I'd hate to see that option go away.

It's an interesting issue, does the Derby project provide just the base
technologies in jar files, as is done today, and let users assemble
combinations, or does Derby provide typical (if not all) combinations?


View raw message