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: DB2JCC, was: [jira] Updated: (DERBY-689) Various improvements to compatibility test.
Date Wed, 09 Nov 2005 18:52:21 GMT
Hi Dan,

I think that I may be talking past you and David. Some confusion may be 
caused by the fact that the compatibility test runs under two harnesses:

1) The derbyall harness runs one combination of the test. This 
combination is ( Client = mainline DerbyClient, ClientVM = user's 
default, Server = mainline DerbyServer, ServerVM = user's default ). 
DB2JCC is not required for this.

2) The compatibility suite harness runs all combinations of the test. 
Currently this only happens when someone bothers to setup the 
environment and run the suite. However, it's my hope that the full suite 
will be run as part of some automated process on a nightly/weekly basis 
and before vetting a release candidate. DB2JCC is part of the required 
environment for this full suite. The required environment also includes 
three vms (jdk1.3, jdk1.4, and jdk1.5) and four Derby releases (10.0,,, mainline jars).

The suite harness is not configurable currently. Right now you have to 
run all combinations and therefore have a complete environment. As part 
of some future submission, I intend to put in logic to make it possible 
to run just one combination under the suite harness. When I do that, I 
can make extraneous parts of the environment (such as DB2JCC) optional.

I hope this clarifies the situation.


Daniel John Debrunner wrote:

>Rick Hillegas wrote:
>>DB2JCC is included because some Derby customers use it and I thought the
>>community would be interested in tracking its compatibility issues. For
>>instance, we might want to understand issues which customers will face
>>if they migrate off DB2JCC onto DerbyClient 10.2. Based on previous
>>email threads, I could see these compatibility issues gating the
>>acceptance of proposals or releases by some of our committers.
>That's great to include tests/framework for JCC.
>The question is can it be optional, or must I download JCC to run these
>tests with combinations that do not include JCC?
>People who want to test JCC should be able to, those that don't
>shouldn't be required to download JCC.

View raw message