On 7/24/07, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/24/07, Dain Sundstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jul 24, 2007, at 7:56 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>
> > On 7/23/07, Dain Sundstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> So, should we drop SQLNestedException?
> >
> > This is tempting, but
On 7/24/07, Dain Sundstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jul 24, 2007, at 7:56 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 7/23/07, Dain Sundstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> So, should we drop SQLNestedException?
>
> This is tempting, but it breaks backward compatibility, so we should
> probably deprec
On Jul 24, 2007, at 7:56 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 7/23/07, Dain Sundstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
DBCP-143 talks about problem with propagation of SQLNestedException
to clients and the comment suggests a conversion to normal Java
nested exception when we switch to Java 1.4. Since we made t
On 7/23/07, Dain Sundstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
DBCP-143 talks about problem with propagation of SQLNestedException
to clients and the comment suggests a conversion to normal Java
nested exception when we switch to Java 1.4. Since we made the leap,
I did a bit of refactoring to remove this
DBCP-143 talks about problem with propagation of SQLNestedException
to clients and the comment suggests a conversion to normal Java
nested exception when we switch to Java 1.4. Since we made the leap,
I did a bit of refactoring to remove this exception class. Basically
I replace:
new