On 08/13/14 20:33, Tom Coleman wrote: > > The "O.T." thread seems to be the subject of intense discussion. > > Would anyone care to share their thoughts on this suggestion? > > Thanks > > On Aug 12, 2014, at 12:56 PM, Tom Coleman wrote: > >> >> On Aug 12, 2014, at 12:11 PM, Jim Starkey wrote: >> >>> I haven't a clue how this can be sorted out. >> I have a suggestion. >> >> Clearly this "New Interface" issue is complex and critical and is going to >> take some time to sort out.
Less than this discussion (I do not want to say that it's useless, on contrary it's useful - but is also takes time). From tech POV - all what's needed is to remove dozens of try/catch/throw from the code. Though even w/o that step firebird will remain build-able almost (may be minor changes in implementation code) out of the box with new interface. >> >> Why not focus on getting FB 3 out the door as a release - API as is - and >> defer the API changes to a later release? This will cause a need to support both interfaces in the future. And they are not exactly compatible. We are at pre-beta stage, we need not keep compatibility now. >> This will generate some buzz and encourage adoption by users who are not >> going to deploy an Alpha product. >> >> And having SMP capability would go a long way to keeping those 800 systems >> on Firebird. >> Certainly. But we want to have release nice in all aspects. And what is left is smaller than what is already done. Because done the most important thing - we got understanding what do we need. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
