Re: SQLJSON
От | Álvaro Hernández Tortosa |
---|---|
Тема | Re: SQLJSON |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5592D0F0.1030705@8Kdata.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: SQLJSON (Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: SQLJSON
|
Список | pgsql-jdbc |
Thanks for asking for the double-check. No, indeed I'm still asking to provide the class files for the API in the package. I feel that's the right way, and I don't see it would create conflicts unless JSR353 would create a new version, something which I believe extremely unlikely until it merges with Java10 or JDBC5 comes out, point at which we would need to change things anyway. However, I don't want to insist more or suck more dev bandwitch, that's my opinion and it's been stated more times than I wish, so I would now leave the decision to the rest of you :) Regards, Alvaro -- Álvaro Hernández Tortosa ----------- 8Kdata On 30/06/15 18:49, Vladimir Sitnikov wrote: > ah. I meant to double-check with Álvaro if he is suggesting compile > type dependency. > > If he means that we in fact are discussing the same thing, so no > contradiction exists. > >> However, regarding POLA you say "compile dependency" which means you >> suggest _not_ including javax.json into pgjdbc.jar >> >> Álvaro , Can you please tell us if "using compile type dependency for both >> javax.json and RI" suits you? >> > Vladimir
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления: