db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel John Debrunner <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: 10.2 release in August?
Date Fri, 28 Apr 2006 16:30:28 GMT
Øystein Grøvlen wrote:

> Satheesh Bandaram wrote:
> 
>> Don't think keeping them undocumented is sufficient.. There are clear
>> specifications posted to JIRA and open source nature of Derby could
>> allow anyone to attempt to use the features. Even otherwise, GRANT and
>> REVOKE statements are well known and don't really need documentation
>> for many users. We would have to remove the underlying code or disable
>> parts of the functionality.
> 
> 
> I do not understand this.  Why do we need to actively prevent users from
> using undocumented features?

They may not be ready and in most case they can use them without reading
documentation as they are standard features. If someone takes an
existing application with GRANT/REVOKE and uses it on Derby they are
working under a false assumption that G/R works. Maybe they are relying
on it to provide security, but maybe Derby's G/R isn't ready so that it
does not provide the expected security. We could say it's that person's
fault for not looking at the Derby docs, or we could not allow them to
get into that situation by removing the feature. Removing the feature
seems a better approach to me as it reduces the risk of a bad reputation
spreading for Derby when people get upset trying to use half implemented
features.

> In order to be able to release often, implementors of larger features
> need to be prepared for a release from trunk before their feature is
> completed. 

I agree that feature development should be mindful of releases, such
that the trunk can be released. But I also think that releasing from the
trunk at any time is somewhat unrealistic, one has to have some plans in
place so that timing of incremental feature development can be based
upon those plans. We had plans for a Derby release in April/May, those
plans got delayed to a Sept/Oct release. All seemed clear, everyone
agreed and people started working to those dates.

This unexpected new release, that will end up very close to the planned
release is what is causing the issues, not the (incremental) development
of features. I've seen no demand for this new release on the user list,
I've seen no evidence of the people wanting this release making
snapshots of their desired features available to the community so that
early testing can begin. I'm still trying to understand what is driving
the desire to have this release, given we will have a planned release
with more features one to two months later.

Dan.



Mime
View raw message