Re: [HACKERS] Proposed change to the JDBC driver
От | Peter Mount |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Proposed change to the JDBC driver |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.10.10001241731400.4761-100000@maidast.retep.org.uk обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Proposed change to the JDBC driver (Peter Mount <petermount@it.maidstone.gov.uk>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Proposed change to the JDBC driver
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
As I haven't seen any replies to this, can I assume no body objects to me making this fairly major change to the driver? I need to know sometime in the next few hours, as I'm about to fit the pieces together. Peter On Wed, 19 Jan 2000, Peter Mount wrote: > I'm sending this to both the hackers and interfaces lists as this > affects the 7.0 release and an interface. > > Ok, up until now the driver has operated under a base package of > postgresql. This has worked fine so far but technically breaks Sun's > rules on package naming. The rule is that any organisations package > names begins with their domain name. This prevents two different package > names from clashing. > > Ie: My own classes always begin with uk.org.retep as my own domain is > retep.org.uk. The classes I write here begin with uk.gov.maidstone. > > Now, what I'm thinking is that as the 7.0 driver isn't going to be > compatible with earlier backends (mainly due to the core changes like > date/time handling, but there are others), I'm proposing to change our > base package name from postgresql to org.postgresql so that we comply > with this rule (which has been around since Java first came out). > > All this involves in the source is to create an empty directory called > org, and move the original postgresql directory into it. Then each .java > file will need org. prefixed to the package name. > > The down side, is that any existing source that uses the driver will > need amending so that either the Class.forName() line reads: > > Class.forName("org.postgresql"); > > or if it's supplied as a parameter (which is my prefered way) the org. > added. > > Now because of this downside, I want to see what everyone thinks about > making this change before I do it, as I have a lot of things to do to > the source to implement it, but it would be better to do it now, > especially as it's the first new major release since JDBC was included. > > Peter > > -- > Peter Mount > Enterprise Support > Maidstone Borough Council > Any views stated are my own, and not those of Maidstone Borough Council. > > > > ************ > -- Peter T Mount peter@retep.org.uk Main Homepage: http://www.retep.org.uk PostgreSQL JDBC Faq: http://www.retep.org.uk/postgresJava PDF Generator: http://www.retep.org.uk/pdf
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: