Michiel Meeuwissen wrote:
So, it'll be simple to supply that one too. Will give a compile-time
depency, which I'm ok with.
Perhaps we can start with that, and it if works fine I'm ok with
dropping JDBC/Multipool completely. Though I still think we could
probably also leave it as an alternative.
I'm not eager for another dependency. If we provide it, I think we
should really drop our own pool code completely.
If we don't drop our own code, we should not add another jar dependency.
It is ridiculous to have exactly the same thing twice, just differently
implemented.
Gomez
_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.mmbase.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
