db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mike Matrigali <mikem_...@sbcglobal.net>
Subject Re: Using JQuery in Apache Derby
Date Tue, 20 Jul 2010 16:57:47 GMT
I'd rather not see the derby project pick up "ownership" of
the source of these jar's.  Once we provide source then the only
way to get fixes is to do them ourselves.  It seems better to be able to
just use the jar's provided by the actual owners so that it
is straight forward to get future fixes.

Is xalan the only option for the functionality it provides or
are there other options that people might want to use, and if so
would hard packaging it in derby actually remove functionality.

If the need is to actually change these jars to provide different
interfaces, that would be different but I don't think that is
the point here.

On ubuntu it seems like you could set up a dependency from the
derby database on the jars needed.  I don't know the mechanism
but I know some packages when I click on them, it then automatically
add packages that are also required.

If we need to set up something optional in development build to
make it easier for developers that is different.


Kathey Marsden wrote:
>  On 7/20/2010 6:27 AM, Nirmal Fernando wrote:
>> Hi Rick,
>> That's great !
>> Just an idea, same way can't we build Xalan from source as well,
>> that will avoid those problematic scenarios with JDK versions and
>> xalan versions.
> Hi Nirmal,
> Can you hold off on both of these for a bit. I think I need to 1) 
> Understand the downstream impact of introducing the MIT license and 2)  
> With repackaging code there are always issues of which version we use 
> and whether other applications running in the same jvm are going to pick 
> up the Derby repackaged version or the one that the other application 
> really wants.
> On 1,  I will try to do some research today and post end of day with my 
> findings. For 2, the only solution I can think of would be to rename the 
> packages, but I don't know if that imposes even more license complexity.
> I am sorry to throw a wrench into your project when I know you are under 
> time constraints, but really need to understand this better.
> Thanks
> Kathey

View raw message