db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Knut Anders Hatlen <knut.hat...@oracle.com>
Subject Re: Sunsetting support for Derby on JVM 1.4
Date Fri, 01 Jul 2011 13:28:10 GMT
Kathey Marsden <kmarsdenderby@sbcglobal.net> writes:

> On 7/1/2011 1:23 AM, Knut Anders Hatlen wrote:
>> Mike Matrigali<mikem_app@sbcglobal.net>  writes:
>>> Rick Hillegas wrote:
>>>> No-one on the user list has objected to sunsetting support for JVM
>>>> 1.4 starting with Derby 10.9. There is still some interest in
>>>> supporting small devices on CDC/FP 1.1. Sunsetting support for JVM
>>>> 1.4 would mean that we would stop running regression tests on that
>>>> platform (starting with Derby 10.9) and we would not spend a lot of
>>>> effort chasing problems on that platform.
>>>> Because we would continue supporting CDC/FP 1.1, we would not be
>>>> able to modernize the bulk of Derby code to take advantage of
>>>> language features introduced by Java 5. These features include
>>>> enums, annotations, and generics.
>>>> I would like to move ahead with sunsetting support for JVM 1.4. I'm
>>>> happy to call a formal vote to ratify this change if people think
>>>> that would be useful. What are your thoughts?
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> -Rick
>>> I am not sure what it means in open source for such a vote.  If anyone
>>> wants to run tests and fix issues for JVM 1.4 or any other JVM that
>>> seems fine to me.  Individual contributors as always can decide which
>>> features and bugs to work on.  It would be different if we were
>>> deciding to actively check
>>> in things to the default Derby set of features that we know would not
>>> work against JVM 1.4 architecture.
>>> As I understand it nothing is changing.
>>> The default set of Derby 10.9 is designed to work
>>> against the JDK 1.4 spec, and allows extensions against more recent
>>> specs for features designed to be "optional and/or enhanced".
>> I was hoping that if we agreed on not supporting Java 1.4 anymore, it
>> would allow us to start using Java 5 features in those areas of the code
>> that aren't used on Java ME. In particular, I was hoping that it opened
>> for the following improvements:
>> - Using Java 5 features in the client driver and the network server.
> I am glad you mentioned this, because I hadn't really thought of it
> this way.  Does this mean that we are ruling out client on small
> devices in the future?  I am not sure that I (or anyone I know)  has
> time to do this but it seems like it would be useful.

The client has never run on CDC devices, and I've never heard of any
plans to implement support for it. And given that our probes both here
and on derby-user have resulted in no one saying they're using Derby on
such devices, I think the likelihood of it being done is close to zero.

I wouldn't think this rules out running the client on small devices in
the future, since small devices in the future (maybe even now) will
hopefully support less constrained environments than CDC FP 1.1.

If it turns out Java 1.4 indeed is the future on small devices, I'd be
somewhat disappointed... ;)

Knut Anders

View raw message