db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew McIntyre" <mcintyr...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Proposed Solutoin ( Was Re: catch-22: Derby, Mustang, and JCP issue)
Date Fri, 23 Jun 2006 20:23:02 GMT
On 6/23/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
> 1) Have Sun change the draft spec license for 221 from the current to
> the new one that allows distribution with appropriate warning markings.
>  I'm going to start working this line w/ the PMO and the JCP.
> 2) Reject Mark Reinhold's curious claim that a relational database is
> actually an implementation of JDBC.  Derby is a relational database that
> among a whole array of features and functionality, one just happens to
> be DBC4.
> 3)  Do your 10.2 GA on your own schedule. Serve your user community.
> Make people happy.  Bathe in the accolades, get good press coverage,
> treat yourself to a nice bottle of wine.  (And put a note in the release
> notes that state the the JDBC4 functionality is "pre-spec" or whatever
> the new draft spec license requires.)
> 4) Release 10.2.1 when Mustang goes GA and remove that sentence in the
> release notes.
> I think in this way, everyone is satisfied.  The ASF is following the
> letter of the law wrt JCP specs (as we always have done), a GA release
> can be made with the functionality needed by Mustang, Sun doesn't have
> to fork Derby, users have no upgrade issues with their "production
> version", etc.
> Comments?


Added bonus that Sun can put a version of JavaDB/Derby into the JDK
that is midstream between the two releases, and which is unmodified
from the Derby source in Subversion.


View raw message