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: DRDA product identifier
Date Mon, 28 Nov 2005 23:33:03 GMT
Francois Orsini wrote:

> I don't think it's OK to share a product ID between IBM Cloudscape and
> Derby.
> The rational is that IBM Cloudscape is different than Derby - NOT at the
> core engine level but at the end the products are labelled differently
> and there is no guarantee that IBM Cloudscape will keep the core engine
> as the same (strictly identical) as Derby's one in the long run - so
> sharing the product ID is not appropriate IMO; even if it looks ok on
> principles...

Even if the DRDA identifier is changed to DRB, IBM Cloudscape would use
DRB as IBM Cloudscape is a re-packaging of Derby. If IBM wanted to have
their own DRDA identifier in the future, that of course would be their
decision and they would have to make any changes to make that happen.

The fact is that Derby is using CSS today, and changing that would break
existing applications. IBM is perfectly happy to have Derby continue to
use CSS for Derby and to change the "ownership" at the DRDA site to be
ASF Derby.

Sticking with CSS seems the easiest safest decision, changing it seems
to be changing it for the sake of change. I can't see what value it
would add to Derby, but lack of backwards compatibility is a big problem.

Maybe Rick could explain how it is good for Derby, changing the identifier?

disclaimer - I work for IBM.

View raw message