db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Knut Anders Hatlen (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (DERBY-5955) Prepare Derby to run with Compact Profiles (JEP 161)
Date Fri, 07 Dec 2012 11:11:21 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-5955?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13526319#comment-13526319
] 

Knut Anders Hatlen commented on DERBY-5955:
-------------------------------------------

Sounds like the interfaces are useful enough for making our internals cleaner, so we could
keep them, but leave them out of the published API. It's easier to add the interfaces to the
published API later if we find that they are useful to applications, than it is to remove
them. So the safe option is to wait and not add them to the published API just yet. Same reasoning
could be used about EmbeddedBaseDataSource.

I'd prefer the DSI part of the interface names to be spelled out, though, as the "I" in the
abbreviation could just as well stand for "Implementation".

As to ReferenceableDataSource and ObjectFactory, if we're worried that the existing full DataSources
no longer implement them, couldn't we reinsert that class between EmbeddedBaseDataSource and
EmbeddedDataSource in the inheritance graph? It looks as if that would preserve the original
shape of the full DataSource implementations and not introduce any JNDI dependencies in the
non-JNDI variants.
                
> Prepare Derby to run with Compact Profiles (JEP 161)
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-5955
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-5955
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Documentation, JDBC, Services, SQL
>            Reporter: Dag H. Wanvik
>            Assignee: Dag H. Wanvik
>         Attachments: client-graph.png, derby-5955-proof-of-concept.diff, derby-5955-proof-of-concept.stat,
derby-5955-ser.zip, embedded-graph.png, old-client-graph.png, old-embedded-graph.png, publishedapi.zip
>
>
> While waiting for a Java module system (aka project Jigsaw), it has been decided to define
a few subsets of the Java SE Platform Specification, cf JEP 161 ( http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/161).
> A quote from the JEP: "More broadly, this feature is intended to enable the migration
of applications currently built on top of the Java ME Connected Device Configuration (CDC)
to appropriate Profiles of the Java SE Platform, part of the long-term effort to converge
CDC with Java SE."
> It would be good if we make Derby to run on such limited profiles. The current proposal
places JDBC in Compact Profile 2 (cf. link above), while other libraries used by Derby, e.g.
javax.naming (JNDI) are in Profile 3 (larger).
> It would be good if Derby could run on the smallest posible platform, i.e. Profile 2,
but that will probably involve some changes to make Derby gracefully limit functionality when
some libraries are missing.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

Mime
View raw message