Re: [Firebird-net-provider] New protocol implementation: Internal namespace changes

2007-05-04 Thread sasha
> No, that is one byte that is being communicated while establishing the > connection. IB 5.x had wire protocol version 9, IB 6.x, FB 1.x, FB 2.0, > IB 7.x (and very likely IB 2007) have protocol version 10. FB 2.1 > supports protocol versions 10 and 11. > > Client talking wire protocol 10 is n

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] New protocol implementation: Internal namespace changes

2007-05-04 Thread Roman Rokytskyy
>>> What is version 10 ? Maby Version_1, Version_2, ets... ? >> It's the version of FB Protocol. AFAIK. > > It's impossible. Newest Interbase server has version 8 and protocol > didn't change in each version, so protocol version can't be greater than > server version. So i think that "version

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] New protocol implementation: Internal namespace changes

2007-05-04 Thread sasha
> Not ODS, but GDS (the protocol version wasn't the right term). Ok, than what GDS has FB 1.0 and FB 1.5 ? - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take co

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] New protocol implementation: Internal namespace changes

2007-05-04 Thread Jiri Cincura
sasha wrote: >>> What is version 10 ? Maby Version_1, Version_2, ets... ? >> >> It's the version of FB Protocol. AFAIK. > > It's impossible. Newest Interbase server has version 8 and protocol > didn't change in each version, so protocol version can't be greater than > server version. So i thi

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] New protocol implementation: Internal namespace changes

2007-05-04 Thread sasha
>> What is version 10 ? Maby Version_1, Version_2, ets... ? > > It's the version of FB Protocol. AFAIK. It's impossible. Newest Interbase server has version 8 and protocol didn't change in each version, so protocol version can't be greater than server version. So i think that "version 10" sou

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] New protocol implementation: Internal namespace changes

2007-05-04 Thread sasha
> 2. > > FirebirdSql.Data.Client.Embedded -> FirebirdSql.Data.Client.Native Thought about this. Can i understand that "native" related to .NET provider, i.e. implemented inside of provider? If so, than here is ambiguity and this is bad namespace and i propose something like FirebirdSql.Data.C

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] New protocol implementation: Internal namespace changes

2007-05-02 Thread Jiri Cincura
sasha wrote: > What is version 10 ? Maby Version_1, Version_2, ets... ? It's the version of FB Protocol. AFAIK. -- Jiri {x2} Cincura http://blog.vyvojar.cz/jirka/ | http://www.ID3renamer.com - This SF.net email is sponsored

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] New protocol implementation: Internal namespace changes

2007-05-02 Thread sasha
> FirebirdSql.Data.Client.Gds -> FirebirdSql.Data.Client.Managed10 > > or > > FirebirdSql.Data.Client.Gds -> FirebirdSql.Data.Client.Managed.Version10 What is version 10 ? Maby Version_1, Version_2, ets... ? > FirebirdSql.Data.Client.Embedded -> FirebirdSql.Data.Client.Native +1 -

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] New protocol implementation: Internal namespace changes

2007-05-02 Thread Oleg Deribas
Hello, Jiri Cincura said the following on 02.05.2007 13:29: >> FirebirdSql.Data.Client.Embedded -> FirebirdSql.Data.Client.Native > > Should be in this word "embedded" too? To not confuse programmers. Native protocol implementation could be used to access regular (not embedded) servers also. S

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] New protocol implementation: Internal namespace changes

2007-05-02 Thread Jiri Cincura
Carlos Guzmán Álvarez ™ wrote: > Hello: > > > OK, I was just think from POV of new programmer taking our assembly. > > It's an internal namespace, so i think there souldn't be any problem > with the name change XD Damn. I'm not focused. So with this (new) :) info it's ok. -- Jiri {x2} Cincur

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] New protocol implementation: Internal namespace changes

2007-05-02 Thread Carlos Guzmán Álvarez ™
Hello: OK, I was just think from POV of new programmer taking our assembly. It's an internal namespace, so i think there souldn't be any problem with the name change XD -- Un saludo Carlos Guzmán Álvarez Vigo-Spain http://carlosga.wordpress.com --

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] New protocol implementation: Internal namespace changes

2007-05-02 Thread Jiri Cincura
Carlos Guzmán Álvarez ™ wrote: > Hello: > > > > Should be in this word "embedded" too? To not confuse programmers. > > I don't think so as right now you can give the dll used as library in > the connection string, > so calling it Native will be more according to this fact, IMHO > > Web can th

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] New protocol implementation: Internal namespace changes

2007-05-02 Thread Carlos Guzmán Álvarez ™
Hello: Should be in this word "embedded" too? To not confuse programmers. I don't think so as right now you can give the dll used as library in the connection string, so calling it Native will be more according to this fact, IMHO Web can think on change the Server Type enum to reflect that a

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] New protocol implementation: Internal namespace changes

2007-05-02 Thread Jiri Cincura
Carlos Guzmán Álvarez ™ wrote: > FirebirdSql.Data.Client.Gds -> FirebirdSql.Data.Client.Managed.Version10 This looks better for me. > > 2. > > FirebirdSql.Data.Client.Embedded -> FirebirdSql.Data.Client.Native Should be in this word "embedded" too? To not confuse programmers. -- Jiri {x2} Ci