Rick Hillegas wrote: > I would like advice on how to handle the conflict between the public > Derby API and JDBC 4.0. This issue was raised by Dan in his comments on > bug 587. > > A) Does this issue block the submission of the 587 fix?
I don't think so. But I think we would want to resolve the issue before release a Derby version that contained this code. Though potentially resolution could wait until JDBC 4.0 was official. > > B) How do we want to handle this conflict in 10.2? > > The problem is that some javax.sql interfaces are incompatible between > jdk1.4 and jdk1.6. A class implementing one of these interfaces can't > run on both the 1.4 and 1.6 vms. This is a showstopper for Derby because > i) our public API contains classes which implement these incompatible > interfaces and ii) we ship a single jar which we expect will run on all > supported vms. The comments on bug 587 suggest some solutions: > > 1) Some, as yet not understood, classloader trick. > > 2) Abandon requirement (ii) and release separate Derby deployments for > 1.4 and 1.6. I would say 2) is out, it seems overkill for a single class to drive a switch to multiple/different versions for different environments. > 3) Change our public API. > > I would appreciate some discussion of this serious problem. Beyond that, I will think more :-) Dan.
