Jon Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > on 2/21/01 10:36 AM, "Brekke, Jeff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > and moving to the sun interfaces would be great. > > Tell me why. I think the main reason is broader API compatibility. -- Daniel Rall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ------------------------------------------------------------ To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/> Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- RE: ConnectionPool ammendemends: JDBC 2.0 Compatibility &am... Brekke, Jeff
- Re: ConnectionPool ammendemends: JDBC 2.0 Compatibilit... Jon Stevens
- Re: ConnectionPool ammendemends: JDBC 2.0 Compatib... Daniel Rall
- Re: ConnectionPool ammendemends: JDBC 2.0 Comp... Jon Stevens
- Re: ConnectionPool ammendemends: JDBC 2.0 ... Daniel Rall
- Re: ConnectionPool ammendemends: JDBC... Jon Stevens
- Re: ConnectionPool ammendemends: ... Sean Legassick
- Re: ConnectionPool ammendemen... Jon Stevens
- Re: ConnectionPool ammendemen... Sean Legassick
- Re: ConnectionPool ammendemen... Jon Stevens
- Re: ConnectionPool ammendemen... Sean Legassick
- Re: ConnectionPool ammendemen... Jon Stevens
- Re: ConnectionPool ammendemen... Sean Legassick
