db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dag.Wan...@Sun.COM (Dag H. Wanvik)
Subject Re: 10.3 blocker issue - DERBY-2728
Date Wed, 30 May 2007 14:39:11 GMT
Myrna van Lunteren <m.v.lunteren@gmail.com> writes:

> Hi,
> We have a bump in our 10.3 release path - DERBY-2728.
> I'd like the opinion of the community as to how we can address this;
> how long would a fix take (and thus delay a release); who would be
> willing to implement a fix?

If we choose to tie enforcement to SQLAuthorization being on, I think
this is a fairly small patch; the existing tests still have test cases
for this (authentication + SQLauthorization), so they could be tweaked
easily too. I expect most work would be to change the documentation
(DERBY-2520). The release note for DERBY-2264 would need to change as
well. I'd be willing to do this work if we choose that approach. I'd
need a week; generally pushing releases less than 2 weeks seems not
worth it, so I suggest a 2 week delay.

DERBY-2728 speaks about making the semantics optional a *upgrade
time*, though, which is another approach. This could imply some
persistence of the fact that the database was upgraded and should have
different semantics than a freshly created one, or use of extra
properties.  If someone volunteers to make such a solution, thats fine
with me.

Note that even if we tie enforcement to SQLAuthorization, some
existing application may still be impacted, although presumably much
fewer applications, since this is a 10.2 feature, and already implies
a database owner concept and is probably less likely to be used in an
embedded context (Kathey's concern).


> Should we make a release candidate while the fixing is in progress?
> Please give your 2 (or other #) cents.
> Regards,
> Myrna

Dag H. Wanvik
Sun Microsystems, Database Technology Group (DBTG)
Haakon VII gt. 7b, N-7485 Trondheim, Norway
Tel: x43496/+47 73842196, Fax:  +47 73842101

View raw message