Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 69031 invoked from network); 19 Jul 2006 19:42:42 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 19 Jul 2006 19:42:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 79135 invoked by uid 500); 19 Jul 2006 19:42:42 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 78960 invoked by uid 500); 19 Jul 2006 19:42:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: Delivered-To: mailing list derby-dev@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 78951 invoked by uid 99); 19 Jul 2006 19:42:41 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 19 Jul 2006 12:42:41 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [32.97.110.150] (HELO e32.co.us.ibm.com) (32.97.110.150) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 19 Jul 2006 12:42:40 -0700 Received: from westrelay02.boulder.ibm.com (westrelay02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.11]) by e32.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k6JJgIWh032142 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2006 15:42:18 -0400 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (d03av02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.168]) by westrelay02.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.6/NCO/VER7.0) with ESMTP id k6JJgHaQ249660 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2006 13:42:17 -0600 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k6JJgHq2007617 for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2006 13:42:17 -0600 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (sig-9-76-204-21.mts.ibm.com [9.76.204.21]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k6JJgGx1007557 for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2006 13:42:17 -0600 Message-ID: <44BE8B15.50403@apache.org> Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 12:42:13 -0700 From: Daniel John Debrunner User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040910 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, de MIME-Version: 1.0 To: derby-dev@db.apache.org Subject: Re: Influencing the standards which govern Derby References: <44BE838A.4010808@sun.com> In-Reply-To: <44BE838A.4010808@sun.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.90.0.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Rick Hillegas wrote: > I would like to understand how the community influences the standards > which govern Derby: > > 1) SQL - I've been participating in Derby for a year now. Over the past > year I don't recall any discussion about a need to change the SQL > standard. We have proposed new language in rare cases not covered by the > ANSI volumes. However, I don't recall any attempt to contact the SQL > group and try to change their spec. Do we need to influence this spec > and if so, how do we propose to do so? I've work with the SQL group through IBM's representives (since I work for IBM). So far from Derby it's been more around getting clarifications and pointing out areas where the spec is unclear or wrong. I don't know how an individual would get involved in this process. You could ask the Postgres folks what why do, or the generic open source database mailing list - hackers@osdbconsortium.org . > 2) JDBC - There has been substantial discussion about the upcoming JDBC4 > spec.. Fortunately for us, the spec lead is a member of our community. > In several cases he has taken our viewpoint back to the JDBC expert > group and advocated our position. However, we don't know who will lead > the expert group for JDBC5. How do we expect to influence the next rev > of JDBC? The ASF is on the JCP "Executive Committee for J2SE/J2EE", in addition it seems individuals can join the JCP for $0. http://jcp.org/en/participation/membership So it seems plenty of opportunity to get involved in the next JDBC. > 3) DRDA - Over the last year, I failed to get a Boolean datatype into > the DRDA spec. This stemmed from the internal dynamics and pay-for-play > nature of the spec's governing body, the DBIOP Consortium. How do we > expect to influence the DRDA spec? Do you have a summary of what happened, I remember e-mails that the DBIOP was getting back together and now your comments that the process didn't work, but I don't recall seeing anything inbetween. > If there's a general solution which covers all of these cases, that's great. > If we handle each spec differently, that's fine too. I'd just like some discussion and guidance. I would guess it's going to be different in each case. Dan.