From open-jpa-dev-return-200-apmail-incubator-open-jpa-dev-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org Tue Aug 01 03:37:47 2006 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-open-jpa-dev-archive@locus.apache.org Received: (qmail 46860 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2006 03:37:47 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Aug 2006 03:37:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 57775 invoked by uid 500); 1 Aug 2006 03:37:47 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-open-jpa-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 57720 invoked by uid 500); 1 Aug 2006 03:37:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact open-jpa-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 57711 invoked by uid 99); 1 Aug 2006 03:37:46 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:37:46 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.9 required=10.0 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE,DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of plinskey@bea.com designates 63.96.176.25 as permitted sender) Received: from [63.96.176.25] (HELO uslcmh01.bea.com) (63.96.176.25) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:37:46 -0700 Received: from ussjfe02.amer.bea.com (ussjfe02b.bea.com [172.16.120.56]) by uslcmh01.bea.com (Switch-3.2.2/Switch-3.2.2) with ESMTP id k713bKWn015447 for ; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 23:37:24 -0400 Received: from repbex02.amer.bea.com ([10.160.26.99]) by ussjfe02.amer.bea.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:37:22 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: JDBC 4 (was: Was it just me?) Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:37:18 -0700 Message-ID: <7D856CDFE035FF45A0420ACBD71BDD6301A3A5A8@repbex02.amer.bea.com> In-Reply-To: <9e3862d80607312033y7d1ab0c1p372b07d1d058f46f@mail.gmail.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: JDBC 4 (was: Was it just me?) Thread-Index: Aca1G0RLyn5rGjdZQPuP/oudTLT7jQAAE0uQ From: "Patrick Linskey" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Aug 2006 03:37:22.0854 (UTC) FILETIME=[CCA1D460:01C6B51B] X-PMX-Version: 4.7.0.111621, Antispam-Engine: 2.0.2.0, Antispam-Data: 2006.7.7.101432 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > > > BTW, you may be aware, but it doesn't compile on Java 6=20 > due to the=20 > > > JDBC interface changes. I'll add that to JIRA if its not there=20 > > > already. > > > > Yeah, we've had this problem in the past as well.=20 > Historically, we've=20 > > created special modified JDBC jars so that we can compile=20 > on earlier=20 > > VM versions. How is this type of problem typically handled=20 > in Apache-land? >=20 > Isn't this the other way around? If the additional methods=20 > are implemented to make it compile on Java 6, it will=20 > continue to be binary compatible with the earlier JDBC versions. Yes, that. Meant "so that we can run on earlier VM versions." So... how does Apache typically deal with this? The only alternate to the way we've done things in the past is an approach that uses dynamic proxies / auto-generated proxies / dynamically-modified classes. -Patrick _______________________________________________________________________ Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.