Knut Anders Hatlen wrote:
other good stuff ...
Our current small device claims aren't based on compile-time
checks. Instead, we rely on warnings raised by community members who
run the tests on small platforms. If we want to continue supporting
small devices, then I think that we ought to be compiling the bulk of
the core engine against CDC/FP 1.1.2 libraries, not against JDK 1.4.2
libraries.
Are you suggesting that we make the Foundation libraries a required
component for building Derby? I'm not sure I think we should do that, as
that would make it even more complicated to compile Derby. I would
rather say that we should should make it possible to build (most of) the
core engine against the Foundation libraries, and it should also be
possible to build it against libraries from a newer JDK. That way we
could make it easier for those who just want to download the source and
build Derby for themselves (they don't need to download many different
JDKs and libraries), and make it possible to get more compile-time
checks for those who care about that and are willing to spend more time
to set up their build environment (primarily active developers and those
who run nightly regression tests).
I agree that we don't want to make the Derby build more complicated for
people who are new to the community. I was suggesting a moderate-sized
chore: provide stubs for the CDC/FP api just as we do for the JSR169 api
today.
Regards,
-Rick
