db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rick Hillegas (JIRA)" <derby-...@db.apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (DERBY-1029) Backout boolean work from the 10.2 branch immediately after the branch is created
Date Mon, 17 Jul 2006 23:10:14 GMT
    [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1029?page=comments#action_12421739 ] 
Rick Hillegas commented on DERBY-1029:

>From the email thread titled "Status of adding BOOLEAN-type":

I have given up on re-enabling the BOOLEAN datatype in the near term, for the following reasons:

1) I can't see when or whether the BOOLEAN datatype will make it into the DRDA spec. After
9 months, the spec's governing body has failed to revive. There seems to be very little industry
interest in funding the continuation of DRDA spec work.

2) The existing (10.1) behavior of Derby BOOLEAN violates the ANSI casting rules. See DERBY-887.
Fixing these casts will break Derby's ODBC metadata and for that reason we suspect that customer
applications will break also. This appears to be the kind of compatibility issue which requires
a major rather than a minor release of Derby. I see the following options:

a) Expose a BOOLEAN datatype which does not conform to the ANSI spec.
b) Break existing customer applications.
c) Wait until the next major release of Derby before re-enabling BOOLEAN.

My vote would be for (2c) but I don't sense enough enthusiasm for BOOLEAN to justify a major
release in the near term.

> Backout boolean work from the 10.2 branch immediately after the branch is created
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: DERBY-1029
>                 URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1029
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: SQL
>    Affects Versions:
>            Reporter: Kathey Marsden
>         Assigned To: Rick Hillegas
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For:
> There was discussion on the list regarding how  to handle this issue but keep the BOOLEAN
work for inclusion in future releases.  The approach discussed was to back the DERBY-499 work
out of the 10.2 branch as soon as it is created, but leave it in the trunk
> I think this an acceptable solution but  only if we can get someone assigned to this
issue that is willing to commit now to doing that work as soon as we branch.   The reverse
merge may be messy at that point do to other changes that have gone in.  
> Is there someone who will volunteer to do this work and assign themselves to this issue?

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira


View raw message