db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hille...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: VOTE: Approach for sharing code
Date Fri, 09 Sep 2005 23:46:27 GMT
Thanks, Dan. You are right, it's best to separate these issues.

Cheers,
-Rick

Daniel John Debrunner wrote:

>Rick Hillegas wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I'm afraid I was too elliptical in my first attempt to describe this
>>problem. Here's my next attempt:
>>
>>    
>>
>[snip]
>  
>
>>The point I am trying to make is this: It seemed to me that code cloning
>>was put forward as an alternative to the compatiblity checking in
>>David's first proposal. I don't think cloning solves this problem. It
>>merely pushes the problem around a bit. We still need run-time
>>compatibility checking.
>>    
>>
>
>I think you are descibing a different problem, communication between the
>client and the server. In that case yes, version compatibility checking
>is needed.
>
>But what David is describing with the common code in separate packages
>does not need versioning, as the code is self contained within its
>domain of engine, client or network server.
>
>You are describing the case where the common code from one domain
>creates something that's consumed by common code in another domain (java
>object in serialized form, drda protocol etc.).
>
>That style would need versioning even if we didn't have common code.
>
>Dan.
>
>  
>


Mime
View raw message