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: Modular build, was: VOTE: Approach for sharing code
Date Wed, 21 Sep 2005 15:06:01 GMT
David W. Van Couvering wrote:


> In my original proposal:
> 
>    * compatibility will be strongly encouraged but not guaranteed
>      against previous minor versions (e.g. a 10.2 consumer works
>      with 10.1 common classes, but a 10.3 consumer has a hard
>      dependency on new methods, it can not work with 10.2
>      common classes).
> 
> Perhaps I remember incorrectly, but I remember us (or enough of us)
> generally agreeing that gracefully dying when Y level function was
> required was not acceptable, as this was a regression of existing
> behavior.  This was the "nail in the coffin" for my original proposal.

Maybe I'm an optimist, but I think that a consumer of common code can
always be coded to keep running (in a reduced mode) when faced with an
older version of the common code. Thus I think this approach can be made
to work, just start with the mindset that dying is unacceptable, rather
than inevitable.

Dan.


Mime
View raw message