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: [PRE-VOTE DISCUSSION] Compatibility rules and interface table
Date Wed, 21 Jun 2006 20:14:27 GMT
Hi David,

I had a couple more comments on the compatibility commitments. Cheers-Rick

  - Changes to stored procedures: We will have to change column order if
   we add Derby-specific columns to a metadata ResultSet and then a later
   JDBC also adds more columns.

  - Changes to Database Tables: We should be allowed to drop indexes
   on System tables.

  - Changes to Command Line Interfaces. I don't understand why error
    message text can't be changed. This contradicts what is said
    in the Interface Table below.

  - Other miscellaneous formats. I'm not clear on what these miscellaneou
   files and strings are. For example, I'd like to make sure that we're 
not enshrining
   the current RUNTIMESTATISTICS output.

  - Interface table:

    o Shouldn't the public client api be stable like the embedded api?

    o What is meant by "Defaults returned by DatabaseMetadata

    o I think that the format of RUNTIMESTATISTICS output is unstable.

David Van Couvering wrote:

> Hi, all.  I am thinking of setting up two separate votes based on the 
> Wiki page at
> http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/ForwardCompatibility
> The first one would be on our overall model/approach to making 
> compatibility commitments, as described in the Wiki page.
> The second would be specifically for the interface table, targetted at 
> the 10.2 release.
> The reason for separating these out is because, for each release, we 
> should update the interface table and have a new vote; the overall 
> model/approach does not need to be updated or voted on for each release.
> I would copy the appropriate text directly into the email for the 
> vote, so that the thing we're voting on is a frozen snapshot, not a 
> live document like the Wiki page.
> I'd like your feedback on this approach.  I'd also like to make sure 
> there aren't any lingering issues with the Wiki page as it stands, 
> before I go through the process of running a vote.
> Thanks,
> David

View raw message