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: catch-22: Derby, Mustang, and JCP issue
Date Fri, 23 Jun 2006 18:12:17 GMT
Hi, Kathey.  I understand your concerns, and I think they're important, 
but I do want to make sure we distinguish two separate issues.

The first issue is around the JCP.  This has nothing to do with a 
company's release schedule.  It has to do with the fact that we as a 
community wanted to ship a product supporting JDBC4.  This holds us to 
certain legal constraints.  Yes, we could ship a feature release "on 
time" without JDBC4 support, but it would be another six months before 
we could do a second feature release that supports JDBC4.  I think it's 
a tough call to decide to hold off on the release a bit or drop an 
interim release.  I thought we as a community decided to hold off on the 
10.2 release, and I thought it was a good compromise to get 10.1.3 out 
in the meantime.

The second issue is around Derby (Java DB) into Sun's JDK.  I think this 
is where there is a bit of a struggle.  I think we all see the value of 
having a redistribution of Derby in the JDK, especially one that allows 
users to upgrade from a database created in this JDK to Derby or to 
other distributions based on Derby.  But it does mean perhaps a *little* 
cooperation, in terms of holding off the release for a few weeks 
(assuming we have that legal right -- let's assume that for now).  I for 
one believe that this little cooperation is worth the benefit.  The 
alternate result is Java DB will be a fork, potentially not upgradeable, 
and there will be a lot of confusion in the marketplace.

I think that folks looking at this list would probably shake their heads 
at all the legal stuff we have to go through, but hopefully will see 
that we are doing our best to make the right decisions.

Thanks,

David

Kathey Marsden wrote:
> David Van Couvering wrote:
> 
>>
>> What happened to the proposal to vote and approve a GA-enabled 
>> release, but not make it actually available until Java SE 6 goes GA?  
>> Did we decide this was not feasible?  I may have missed it, but I 
>> don't think I saw that discussion anywhere.
>>
> This was my comment regarding my concerns about this dependency. 
> http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-catch-22%3A-Derby%2C-Mustang%2C-and-JCP-issue-p5012231.html

> 
> 
> I think from a community perspective we would like other new projects to 
> look at us as a good example.  Will they say Yes! Let's do it just like 
> Derby:
> - Wait more than a year for our first feature release,
> -  Make  pseudo GA release and ask our Release Manager to hold onto it 
> until  the company he works for releases their comercial product that 
> uses it.
> -  Set a precedent for external comercial dependencies on our release 
> criteria.
> 
> I think/hope  they won't.
> 
> Kathey
> 

Mime
View raw message