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: Derby interface stabilities
Date Tue, 28 Mar 2006 20:52:30 GMT
Hi David,

This is great. Thanks for pulling this together. I have one nit: 
Currently, we say that the Release Notes document only changes to 
Unstable interfaces. I think the Release Notes should document changes 
to Stable and Standard interfaces (which ought to be rare), and the 
Release Notes should document the transition of  interfaces from 
Supported to Deprecated to Removed.

Regards,
-Rick

David W. Van Couvering wrote:

> The discussion of the stability of SQL States inspired me to finally 
> apply what I've learened here at Sun in terms of explicitly declaring 
> the stability one guarantees for each interface and applying it to Derby.
>
> I have updated Dan's forward compatibility page with a draft of what 
> this might look like.  Dan, I took all the interfaces you called out 
> and merged them into the interface table, and added many more, as well 
> as some background information around interfaces and stability 
> definitions.
>
> I think one component that is still missing is: what does it mean to 
> make an incompatible change, for various types of interfaces?  As an 
> example, it's OK to add a column to an existing system table, but not 
> OK to change the type of an existing column; it's OK to add columns to 
> the result set of a metadata query; it's OK to add a method to an 
> existing interface but you can't change an existing method, and so on.
>
> Please see http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/ForwardCompatibility, and 
> modify or comment as you see fit.  It is not necessarily my itch to be 
> the one responsible for maintaining this interface table; I hope 
> that's something that can be shared across a number of us. But I did 
> want to get something out there for us to look at and start discussing.
>
>
> David



Mime
View raw message