It's been awfully quiet out there. Are there really no other opinions
about this. One little peep from Dan and another from Kathey, and we're
done? Is this the derby-dev alias I know and love?
I mean, maybe it's just *that* good that there is no debate, but
somehow, I wonder...
I'll give it another 24 hours, and if there are no other comments, I'm
going to basically take the contents of these page and put them up for a
vote. If the vote passes, I'll migrate the contents of the vote to the
"main" web site so that our "contracts" around these interfaces
stabilities are more or less set in stone, as it were.
David
David W. Van Couvering wrote:
Hi, all. I would like to propose that we have a discussion, in
preparation for (at some time in the future) a vote on the interface
table I put together at
http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/ForwardCompatibility
The approach I was thinking of is:
- everybody who is interested take a look at this table, and raise
issues as needed
- discussion ensues as needed
- I will incrementally update the Wiki page when it seems there is a
consensus on a particular issue
Once things have somewhat stabilized (and where there is contention,
people are starting to repeat themselves :)), I'll then I'll hold a
vote. The vote email will contain the relevant text and the interface
table from the Wiki page, so that we know what we're voting on and so
that it ends up in the archives.
This interface table would be for the next release of Derby (10.1.3 or
10.2, whichever comes first).
I would like to suggest that if you want to discuss the stability
classification of a *particular* interface, you do so with a separate,
specific email subject line, so that those who may be interested will
notice and participate.
How does this sound?
Does anyone think we need to vote on the interface taxonomy and the
definition of an interface separate from the stability classifications
given to each interface?
David
