db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "David W. Van Couvering" <David.Vancouver...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: [jira] Commented: (DERBY-289) Enable code sharing between Derby client and engine
Date Thu, 08 Sep 2005 13:35:30 GMT
I was completely unaware of 
java.lang.Package().getSpecificationVersion(), very interesting!  I've 
taken a look at the Javadoc but am unable to see how I can override 
this.  In particular, our algorithm for determining compatibility is 
quite different from the default behavior.

Regarding the three-part version number, I was thinking we needed this 
to be able to test for compatibility without having to parse an integer 
--we need to see if the major versions are the same, greater, less than, 
etc.  But perhaps this is not needed if our known incompatibilities are 
encoded.  Let me investigate this, and if at all possible I'll adjust to 
a single integer (or String if getSpecificationVersion() makes sense).

Thanks,

David

Daniel John Debrunner wrote:

>Jeremy Boynes wrote:
>
>  
>
>>David Van Couvering (JIRA) wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>VERSION DETECTION
>>>
>>>The Version class will be defined as a common class and is used to
>>>define a version and check for compatibility between a consumer and
>>>the common package.  Here is a first pass at the methods on this class.
>>>  
>>>      
>>>
>>Do we need a custom implementation or can we use the version information
>>returned from java.lang.Package().getSpecificationVersion() ?
>>    
>>
>
>I agree, or can it be even simpler? Is a three part version number
>really required for common components? Could a simple integer suffice?
>
>Dan.
>
>  
>

Mime
View raw message