db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kathey Marsden <kmarsdende...@sbcglobal.net>
Subject Re: Modular build, was: VOTE: Approach for sharing code
Date Wed, 14 Sep 2005 16:46:07 GMT
David W. Van Couvering wrote:

> Hi, Kathy, thanks for your email.  The timing is actually pretty good,
> I was just talking with Francois trying to understand his concerns
> better.
>
> After quickly describing the two approaches, I'd like to summarize the
> experience/impact of these approaches from the perspectives of the end
> user, the developer/maintainer, and the test developer/runner.
>

Thank you David for the summary.  I thought "modular build"  meant 
adding more jars,  so it was good to have that cleared  With Approach 1
I personally am not too keen on the new ordering requirements,  testing
requirements, or the potential for regression with the versioning scheme.

For the USER EXPERIENCE  for either approach, how much  growth do you
anticipate in the client due to code sharing  with the first round of
what you want to share and a guesstimate of how big it might get if we
utilize all that you think the client should use from  the engine?   
The earlier thread on the size of the common jar file
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/db-derby-dev/200507.mbox/%3c42DF40D5.8050605@debrunners.com%3e
made it sound significant. 

Kathey



Mime
View raw message