Pierre van Rooden wrote:
> Michiel Meeuwissen wrote:
>
> >But of course I'm all +1 for cleaning up al other mess. I'll change to
> >+0 with the amendements of Pierre, and to +1 if jdbc.xml with its
> >basic classes (JDBC, MultiPool and one or two others) simply remain
> >forever, though of course cleaned, or - of course - if one can
> >convince me that my points are invalid or irrelevant.
> >
> >
> I'm not sure what the difference is between the ammendments I made and
> your suggestion? I am in favor of kepeing the pool code (cleaned), but I
> would personally like to drop MultiConnnection/MultiStatement if
> possible, and probably move it to a storage 'datasource' package. The
> JDBC Module should be rewritten to provide a datasource instead of a
> connection.
There is not much difference. Though I would probably not drop
MultiConnection if not possible :-) And I was under the impression that
you would want to at least deprecated it and then drop it in the next
version ('grace period'). I think we should choose to let this be a
part of MMBase, also in 1.9, 2.0. Well, unless we decide otherwise
then... So, I'm still only +0 if these classes (even if cleaned/moved
etc) are still marked as 'deprecated-now'.
Michiel
--
Michiel Meeuwissen mihxil'
Peperbus 111 MediaPark H'sum [] ()
+31 (0)35 6772979 nl_NL eo_XX en_US
_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.mmbase.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
