Re: JDBC 4 Compliance

I've phrased this before but I'm of the mind to avoid "stable" and
"experimental" references.  I imagine a scenario where there is no
"official" driver but simply "blessed" drivers.  Blessed drivers have been
reviewed by the PostgreSQL JDBC team for functionality, performance, and
stability and have had a comparison/review done and published.  There might
be two or three experimental drivers in the wild at any given time that have
chosen different trade-offs.  In many ways similar to how Linux and Distros
inter-operate though the core is spec and not necessarily a shared codebase.
But whereas Linux doesn't really care about the Distros the PostgreSQL JDBC
team would indeed try to care about the different implementations that are
in the wild.

David J.


Adam Gray wrote
> I think if you're looking to differentiate in the maven naming, you'd
> probably want to use a qualifier instead of changing the artifact id.
> Using the qualifier, you can leave the stable driver as is and only add an
> "experimental" qualifier to the unstable new builds.
>
> Having already volunteered to work on getting the existing driver into
> Maven I see the easiest way is to introduce two new artifact IDs.
> Currently the artifact ID is simply postgresql but there is no reason we
> couldn't use 'stable' and 'experimental' (experimental is the best I
> could come up with off the top of my head!).





--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/JDBC-4-Compliance-tp5760468p5761450.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - jdbc mailing list archive at Nabble.com.