On Fri, 1 Jun 2001, Sam Ruby wrote:
> Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
> >
> > As Sam warned us, GUMP is experimentally using the JDK 1.4 beta for Linux
> > for a while. The failures below are due to some JDBC 3.0 methods that
> > were added to some of the javax.sql interfaces -- everything still works
> > fine with JDK 1.3.
> >
> > FWIW, this is why I migrated Struts to mostly using base classes instead
> > of interfaces for public APIs -- adding a new method to an interface
> > breaks *everybody's* old code.
>
> So the questions are
>
> (1) Is it worth (or even possible?) to add those methods in anticipation of
> JDBC 3.0? Such methods might not be called with prior versions of JDBC,
> but otherwise are likely harmless.
>
That's a good idea, although we'll also have to track any changes as JDK
1.4 goes through its beta cycle.
I don't have time to work on it -- volunteers?
> (2) Should we provide feedback to the people writing the JDBC 3.0 specs?
> Perhaps suggest an alternative?
>
Doing the implementation now will force us to understand what's being
proposed (instead of waiting for it to be a fait acompli). I need to look
at it more before knowing what feedback I'd want to give -- there might
very well be compelling reasons to add methods to the interfaces in spite
of the impact on all existing JDBC driver and connection pool
implementations.
> - Sam Ruby
>
> P.S. The whole point of Gump is to experimentally use the latest versions
> of dependencies...
>
>
I guess I didn't make it clear -- I wasn't complaining! I just wanted to
warn people who didn't see your earlier messages about why the failures
just started occurring.
Are you also continuing to run GUMP (in parallel) under 1.3? If not, that
would still be useful.
Craig
