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: DB2JCC, was: [jira] Updated: (DERBY-689) Various improvements to compatibility test.
Date Wed, 09 Nov 2005 17:28:15 GMT
Rick Hillegas wrote:

> Hi David,
> Thanks for this improvement.
> Right now, the DB2 JCC libraries are required for running the full set
> of combinations. 

Should the DB2 JCC libraries be required to run Derby's tests?
The suite derbyall skips the JCC tests (derbynetmats) if JCC is not in
the classpath.

> I don't understand Derby's long term relationship with
> this code. 

It's actually very simple. DB2 JCC should be treated like any other
program that works with Derby, say Hibernate, Apache James, JDO, IBM
WAS,  Cheese Lab etc.

Some aspects of DB2 JCC that maybe make it look different are:

     - it uses the socket based api to Derby defined in terms of DRDA.
     - tests have been contributed that test DB2 JCC and Derby.

But, I don't believe they give it any special status compared to other uses.

> As we add new JDBC support (e.g., JDBC 4.0), we have no
> control over the behavior of this client.

Not sure what point you are trying to make here. The DBC JCC client
supports JDBC 3.0 and works today, if Derby has added JDBC 4.0 to its
clients, how does that affect an independent client?

> Do we expect customers to
> migrate onto Derby's client as of 10.1?

Not sure we "expect" anything, people use what they want.

> I'm not aware of any discussions
> about either continuing or sunsetting support for DB2 JCC.

It's really about code contributions.

  - Any submission (or commit) that breaks existing functionality/api's
has the potential to be vetoed.

- A submission (or commit) that follows the specs, does not change the
api, but breaks some specific use of that api, then really it's the
problem of that use to resolve it. The actual case may determine how we
treat that submission in terms of commiting it and/or trying to resolve it.

I guess its also about that itch, if people have the itch to continue
supporting JCC (or anything else) then they will put effort into it. The
only decision point comes if that effort is in some way preventing some
progress on something else, someone else's itch. Then neither is more
important than the other, it's up to the community to discuss and decide
the direction or solution.


View raw message