db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Knut Anders Hatlen <Knut.Hat...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: JDK 1.4 support
Date Mon, 01 Dec 2008 15:26:36 GMT
Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hillegas@Sun.COM> writes:

> The user list has been discussing Derby's future support for JDK 1.4:
> http://www.nabble.com/JDK-1.4-support--td20650279.html#a20650279 I am
> moving that thread over to the developer list now.

The user who started the thread also logged it as DERBY-3966.

> Dag and Knut have raised the issue of small device
> support. BUILDING.txt suggests that Derby will run on CDC/Foundation
> Profile 1.0. I don't believe that's true anymore. I think that we
> abandoned CDC/FP 1.0 when we abandoned JDK 1.3. For the last couple
> releases, I believe that we have only been claiming that Derby will
> run on CDC/FP 1.1.2. That api is a subset of JDK 1.4.2 (see for
> instance http://java.sun.com/products/foundation/ ).

This is my understanding too.

> Our current small device claims aren't based on compile-time
> checks. Instead, we rely on warnings raised by community members who
> run the tests on small platforms. If we want to continue supporting
> small devices, then I think that we ought to be compiling the bulk of
> the core engine against CDC/FP 1.1.2 libraries, not against JDK 1.4.2
> libraries.

Are you suggesting that we make the Foundation libraries a required
component for building Derby? I'm not sure I think we should do that, as
that would make it even more complicated to compile Derby. I would
rather say that we should should make it possible to build (most of) the
core engine against the Foundation libraries, and it should also be
possible to build it against libraries from a newer JDK. That way we
could make it easier for those who just want to download the source and
build Derby for themselves (they don't need to download many different
JDKs and libraries), and make it possible to get more compile-time
checks for those who care about that and are willing to spend more time
to set up their build environment (primarily active developers and those
who run nightly regression tests).

Knut Anders

View raw message