Oliver Jowett wrote:
> Are we still tracking the main tree's release cycle then? I thought part
> of the reason for moving to gborg was because the JDBC driver's release
> cycle didn't match the main tree's release cycle well?
> I have a large stack of not-yet-ready-for-prime-time v3 protocol changes
> that I'd like to get in at some point -- but I don't want to get bitten
> by "we're in beta, this is too big to apply". Are we planning on a
> code/feature freeze or similar, tracking whatever 7.5 is doing?
I suspect we are trying to track the server release schedule. 7.5 looks
like it might be the first server release in a while that didn't require
changes to the jdbc driver to remain compatible with it. So I don't
know of a reason right now that would force a new jdbc version at the
same time as 7.5 of the server, however I think it is a good idea.
As for the move to gborg, the rational of different release cycles was
one argument made by those forcing the jdbc driver out of the base
source tree. Jdbc was moved to gborg not by choice but by mandate.
In response to
pgsql-jdbc by date
|Next:||From: Karel Zak||Date: 2004-05-06 08:25:45|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Weird prepared stmt behavior|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2004-05-06 00:40:27|
|Subject: Re: V3 extended query protocol and type problems |