David Van Couvering wrote: > Jean T. Anderson wrote: >> David Van Couvering wrote: >>> Laura Stewart (JIRA) wrote: >>>> [ >>>> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1271?page=comments#action_12434569 >>>> >>>> ] Laura Stewart commented on DERBY-1271: >>>> -------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> Jean - >>>> Here is my attempt at wordsmithing... >>>> >>>> "JDBC 4.0 functionality is not enabled in this Derby release. JDBC 4.0 >>>> is part of Java SE 6, which was not generally available for Derby >>>> 10.2. When you use Derby with a Java SE 6 virtual machine, JDBC 3.0 is >>>> available. JDBC 4.0 is available only to developers who download Java >>>> SE 6 and use it to add JDBC 4.0 support to Derby. The Release Notes >>>> explain how to build the JDBC 4.0 functionality with Derby 10.2. When >>>> Java SE 6 becomes generally available, a follow-on Derby release will >>>> include final JDBC 4.0 functionality. " >>> >>> >>> - I think 'was not generally available at the time of the Derby 10.2 >>> release' is a better phrasing >> >> I really like the positive spin of Myrna's suggested first sentence: > >>> This release includes JDBC 4.0 functionality based on a pre-release of >>> Java SE 6. >> >> could that replace the first two sentences? > > Yes
I'll try this on for size and upload a new review draft: This release includes JDBC 4.0 functionality based on a pre-release of Java SE 6. When you use Derby with a Java SE 6 virtual machine, Derby will use its JDBC 3.0 drivers, just as with 1.4 and 1.5 virtual machines. JDBC 4.0 is available only to developers who download Java SE 6 and use it to build in support for JDBC 4.0. The Release Notes explain how to build the JDBC 4.0 functionality with Derby 10.2. When Java SE 6 becomes generally available, a follow-on Derby release will include final JDBC 4.0 functionality. thanks Laura, David, and Myrna, -jean
