Remaining issue outlined in Derby 261

[Jeff Levitt <de...@mylevita.com>]

I just opened a new Jira issue for documenting the
Derby Network Client:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-261

I am in the process of implementing the goals outlined
in that issue.  However, as I mentioned in the entry,
we don't have resolution on whether to completely
remove information on using the IBM DB2 JDBC driver
(and possibly create an external whitepaper at some
point), or whether to create a new section in the
Server and Admin guide that describes the differing
syntax, along with some examples, should a user wish
to use that driver instead of the new Network Client. 


So far we have one voice of support for:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.db.derby.devel/3519
and one against:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.db.derby.devel/3478

Are there any other opinions out there?

I'd like to get some sort of consensus, as I am almost
ready to send a first draft of a patch for review.

Thanks!

Re: Remaining issue outlined in Derby 261

[si...@insession.com]

I think we should provide migration information for existing IBM DB2 JDBC 
driver users.  It can only aid the migration to, or adoption of Derby by 
end users and software vendors.

John

This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential, 
proprietary or non-public information.  This information is intended 
solely for the designated recipient(s).  If an addressing or transmission 
error has misdirected this e-mail, please notify the sender immediately 
and destroy this e-mail.  Any review, dissemination, use or reliance upon 
this information by unintended recipients is prohibited.  Any opinions 
expressed in this e-mail are those of the author personally.

Jeff Levitt <de...@mylevita.com> wrote on 06/05/2005 09:07:17 AM:

> I just opened a new Jira issue for documenting the
> Derby Network Client:
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-261
> 
> I am in the process of implementing the goals outlined
> in that issue.  However, as I mentioned in the entry,
> we don't have resolution on whether to completely
> remove information on using the IBM DB2 JDBC driver
> (and possibly create an external whitepaper at some
> point), or whether to create a new section in the
> Server and Admin guide that describes the differing
> syntax, along with some examples, should a user wish
> to use that driver instead of the new Network Client. 
> 
> 
> So far we have one voice of support for:
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.db.derby.devel/3519
> and one against:
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.db.derby.devel/3478
> 
> Are there any other opinions out there?
> 
> I'd like to get some sort of consensus, as I am almost
> ready to send a first draft of a patch for review.
> 
> Thanks!