You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to derby-user@db.apache.org by Kristian Waagan <Kr...@Sun.COM> on 2006/06/26 15:40:28 UTC
Status of adding BOOLEAN-type (was: Re: Proposal for 10.2 release
schedule)
Rick Hillegas wrote:
> Hi Kathey,
>
> Right now, I'm planning to back out BOOLEAN before the branch.
Hi Rick,
Does this mean the work already done for adding the BOOLEAN-type is not
appropriate for completion in 10.3 (or a later release)?
In case the work already done is to be discarded, can the reason(s)
behind this decision be (briefly) stated?
Thanks,
--
Kristian
>
> Regards,
> -Rick
>
> Kathey Marsden wrote:
>
>> Rick Hillegas wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Andrew,
>>>
>>> Like you I'm happy that Geir Magnusson is working the JCP issues and
>>> I'm optimistic that the time line, which had been twisted into a
>>> pretzel, can be straightened out. I'm not ready to propose an
>>> alternative--but I expect to know more soon. Something along the
>>> lines of your proposal would be very attractive.
>>>
>>> I'm glad that you're comfortable with cutting a branch in early
>>> August. Perhaps we could move the discussion forward to this topic
>>> now. I know that several contributors still want to complete work on
>>> features for 10.2. Does everyone feel comfortable with having those
>>> features committed by August 10 so that we can cut a 10.2 branch then?
>>
>>
>> For BOOLEAN do you still plan back out that work right after the branch?
>> Relevant issues:
>> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1029
>> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-984
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: Status of adding BOOLEAN-type
Posted by Andrew McIntyre <mc...@gmail.com>.
Argh - should have gone to derby-dev. stupid gmail.
On 6/26/06, Andrew McIntyre <mc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Rick Hillegas wrote:
> > Hi Kathey,
> >
> > Right now, I'm planning to back out BOOLEAN before the branch.
>
> Hi Rick,
>
> Don't you mean you'll back out the current BOOLEAN work from 10.2
> *after* it has been branched?
>
> Or do you think we should give up completely due to the issues with
> the DRDA spec committee that you mentioned?
>
> andrew
Re: Status of adding BOOLEAN-type
Posted by Andrew McIntyre <mc...@gmail.com>.
Rick Hillegas wrote:
> Hi Kathey,
>
> Right now, I'm planning to back out BOOLEAN before the branch.
Hi Rick,
Don't you mean you'll back out the current BOOLEAN work from 10.2
*after* it has been branched?
Or do you think we should give up completely due to the issues with
the DRDA spec committee that you mentioned?
andrew
Re: Status of adding BOOLEAN-type
Posted by Rick Hillegas <Ri...@Sun.COM>.
Hi Kristian,
I have given up on re-enabling the BOOLEAN datatype in the near term,
for the following reasons:
1) I can't see when or whether the BOOLEAN datatype will make it into
the DRDA spec. After 9 months, the spec's governing body has failed to
revive. There seems to be very little industry interest in funding the
continuation of DRDA spec work.
2) The existing (10.1) behavior of Derby BOOLEAN violates the ANSI
casting rules. See DERBY-887. Fixing these casts will break Derby's ODBC
metadata and for that reason we suspect that customer applications will
break also. This appears to be the kind of compatibility issue which
requires a major rather than a minor release of Derby. I see the
following options:
a) Expose a BOOLEAN datatype which does not conform to the ANSI spec.
b) Break existing customer applications.
c) Wait until the next major release of Derby before re-enabling BOOLEAN.
My vote would be for (2c) but I don't sense enough enthusiasm for
BOOLEAN to justify a major release in the near term.
Regards,
-Rick
Kristian Waagan wrote:
> Rick Hillegas wrote:
>
>> Hi Kathey,
>>
>> Right now, I'm planning to back out BOOLEAN before the branch.
>
>
> Hi Rick,
>
> Does this mean the work already done for adding the BOOLEAN-type is
> not appropriate for completion in 10.3 (or a later release)?
>
> In case the work already done is to be discarded, can the reason(s)
> behind this decision be (briefly) stated?
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
Re: Status of adding BOOLEAN-type
Posted by "Jean T. Anderson" <jt...@bristowhill.com>.
Moving this thread back to derby-dev. Kristian responded to a thread
that was inadvertently put on derby-user.
Let's please keep release discussions on derby-dev. This is where
planning and decisions belong.
thanks,
-jean
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Status of adding BOOLEAN-type (was: Re: Proposal for 10.2
release schedule)
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 15:40:28 +0200
From: Kristian Waagan <Kr...@Sun.COM>
Reply-To: Derby Discussion <de...@db.apache.org>
Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc.
To: Derby Discussion <de...@db.apache.org>
References: <44...@sun.com>
<54...@mail.gmail.com>
<44...@sun.com> <44...@sbcglobal.net>
<44...@sun.com>
Rick Hillegas wrote:
> Hi Kathey,
>
> Right now, I'm planning to back out BOOLEAN before the branch.
Hi Rick,
Does this mean the work already done for adding the BOOLEAN-type is not
appropriate for completion in 10.3 (or a later release)?
In case the work already done is to be discarded, can the reason(s)
behind this decision be (briefly) stated?
Thanks,
--
Kristian
>
> Regards,
> -Rick
>
> Kathey Marsden wrote:
>
>> Rick Hillegas wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Andrew,
>>>
>>> Like you I'm happy that Geir Magnusson is working the JCP issues and
>>> I'm optimistic that the time line, which had been twisted into a
>>> pretzel, can be straightened out. I'm not ready to propose an
>>> alternative--but I expect to know more soon. Something along the
>>> lines of your proposal would be very attractive.
>>>
>>> I'm glad that you're comfortable with cutting a branch in early
>>> August. Perhaps we could move the discussion forward to this topic
>>> now. I know that several contributors still want to complete work on
>>> features for 10.2. Does everyone feel comfortable with having those
>>> features committed by August 10 so that we can cut a 10.2 branch then?
>>
>>
>> For BOOLEAN do you still plan back out that work right after the branch?
>> Relevant issues:
>> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1029
>> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-984
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: Status of adding BOOLEAN-type
Posted by Rick Hillegas <Ri...@Sun.COM>.
Hi Kristian,
I have given up on re-enabling the BOOLEAN datatype in the near term,
for the following reasons:
1) I can't see when or whether the BOOLEAN datatype will make it into
the DRDA spec. After 9 months, the spec's governing body has failed to
revive. There seems to be very little industry interest in funding the
continuation of DRDA spec work.
2) The existing (10.1) behavior of Derby BOOLEAN violates the ANSI
casting rules. See DERBY-887. Fixing these casts will break Derby's ODBC
metadata and for that reason we suspect that customer applications will
break also. This appears to be the kind of compatibility issue which
requires a major rather than a minor release of Derby. I see the
following options:
a) Expose a BOOLEAN datatype which does not conform to the ANSI spec.
b) Break existing customer applications.
c) Wait until the next major release of Derby before re-enabling BOOLEAN.
My vote would be for (2c) but I don't sense enough enthusiasm for
BOOLEAN to justify a major release in the near term.
Regards,
-Rick
Kristian Waagan wrote:
> Rick Hillegas wrote:
>
>> Hi Kathey,
>>
>> Right now, I'm planning to back out BOOLEAN before the branch.
>
>
> Hi Rick,
>
> Does this mean the work already done for adding the BOOLEAN-type is
> not appropriate for completion in 10.3 (or a later release)?
>
> In case the work already done is to be discarded, can the reason(s)
> behind this decision be (briefly) stated?
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,