Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 52497 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2005 18:21:58 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 23 Aug 2005 18:21:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 73950 invoked by uid 500); 23 Aug 2005 18:21:57 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 73929 invoked by uid 500); 23 Aug 2005 18:21:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Derby Development" Delivered-To: mailing list derby-dev@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 73915 invoked by uid 99); 23 Aug 2005 18:21:57 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:21:57 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [192.18.98.36] (HELO brmea-mail-4.sun.com) (192.18.98.36) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:22:14 -0700 Received: from phys-d3-ha21sca-2 ([129.145.155.165]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j7NILsTY027404 for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 12:21:54 -0600 (MDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.ha21sca-mail1.sfbay.sun.com by ha21sca-mail1.sfbay.sun.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.24 (built Dec 19 2003)) id <0ILO00701TJY0X@ha21sca-mail1.sfbay.sun.com> (original mail from Richard.Hillegas@Sun.COM) for derby-dev@db.apache.org; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:21:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.150.29.192] (vpn-129-150-29-192.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.150.29.192]) by ha21sca-mail1.sfbay.sun.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.24 (built Dec 19 2003)) with ESMTP id <0ILO00LK6TOM6S@ha21sca-mail1.sfbay.sun.com> for derby-dev@db.apache.org; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:21:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:22:19 -0700 From: Rick Hillegas Subject: derby standards To: Derby Development Message-id: <430B695B.6010309@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N I'm afraid I'm having a hard time figuring out Derby's relationship to what might be called standards. The following principles seem to be regularly advocated: 1) Derby should avoid inventing its own syntax and apis. 2) Instead, Derby should adopt syntax and apis endorsed by the following authorities: - ANSI SQL 2003 - JDBC 4.0 - JSRs - Other Apache projects From time to time, other authorities are recommended even though they conflict with principle (2): 3) Non-ANSI syntax used by popular databases like Oracle, DB2, Postgres, and MySQL. 4) Constraints imposed by DRDA. Principle (3) proves to be particularly nettlesome since the popular databases often disagree. As we expand Derby, I would like to understand how we reconcile these principles. Perhaps, first, we should state what Derby hopes to gain by compliance. The following benefits might apply: A) Familiar syntax and apis encourage developers to use Derby for new embedded applications. B) Compatible syntax and apis encourage migration of old applications to Derby from other databases. C) Compatible syntax and apis make it easy to scale up usage of a Derby-developed application by migrating it to an enterprise-calibre dbms. With four popular databases to keep in mind, benefits (B) and (C) seem hard to satisfy. I am worried that we are in danger of building a database which does not deliver any of these benefits. I would like to see us clarify our goals and compliance policies. Cheers, -Rick