db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Van Couvering <David.Vancouver...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Proposal for 10.2 release schedule
Date Thu, 22 Jun 2006 22:42:58 GMT
Ok, this is very tricky.  First, I'd like to make sure we're on the same 
page here about Java DB going into the JDK.  I think in general the 
community thinks it's a good thing for Derby for Java DB to be in the 
JDK.  It gives us great exposure and distribution.  I also think the 
community would probably like it if databases created by the version of 
Java DB to be upgradable to a subsequent release of Derby, so that users 
can get the latest and greatest functionality of Derby directly from the 
Apache web site, or even upgrade to a future release of Cloudscape if 
they decide to get support from IBM.

In order for this to work, we need Java DB to be based on an official, 
"GA-ready" release of Derby to be what Sun redistributes in Mustang. 
Otherwise databases created in Mustang will be "locked in" to Java DB.

The problem is that it can't *actually* be GA until after JCP approves 
JSR 221, JDBC 4.0, which will happen in tandem with the GA release of 
the JDK, around 5 weeks after the JDK team needs their final integration 
bits from all the pieces going into it.

I think what Rick is asking for is a release that is voted as 
"GA-ready", has the GA-bit turned on, but because of JCP rules is not 
actually *made* generally available until JSR 220 becomes final.  Since 
we all need to vet this release and approve it, it would be available to 
the Derby community, but not *generally* available by distributing it on 
all the Apache mirrors.

I know this seems like a fine hair to split, but it's the only way we 
can be successful without Sun having to do a non-upgradable fork of 
Derby, which I don't think any of us want.

I hope this helps to clear things up, even if it doesn't make things 
simpler :)


Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
> Rick Hillegas wrote:
>> Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
>>> The mid-Sep Derby release candidate will be marked alpha or beta (JCP
>>> rules) so the databases won't upgrade anyway.
>> I apologize for creating confusion here. We'd like Mustang to ship with
>> a fully functional Derby, which creates upgradeable databases. So I'm
>> assuming that we turn off the beta marker on the vetted candidate before
>> handing the candidate to Mustang for QA bake-in.
> Sorry, I don't understand, I thought Derby 10.2 cannot be marked GA
> until Mustang ships. How can it be marked GA without violating the JCP
> requirements.
> Sorry if I'm being dense.
> Dan.

View raw message