>>>>>>>>>>>> Rick Hillegas wrote (2007-05-30 06:26:08): > Bernt M. Johnsen wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>Ståle Deraas wrote (2007-05-30 08:23:05): > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>Maybe the thread "Q: Should Derby 10.3 be Derby 11?" raised by Bernt is > >>what people are thinking of...... > >> > > > >The thread is here: > >http://www.nabble.com/Q:-Should-Derby-10.3-be-Derby-11--tf3260195.html > > > > > I have reviewed this email thread. It is largely a discussion about how > compatibility issues affect release names. It includes some discussion > about the secure-server work (DERBY-2196). It does not have much to say > about DERBY-2264.
That's right. My question was raised based on the fact that my db start script suddenly needed a -noSecurityManager switch in 10.3. I.e. an incompatability. Stan is pointing at another incompatability, but in principle it's the same kind of problem: 10.3 will not be compatible with 10.2. > The discussion motivated us to document the > incompatibilities introduced by DERBY-2196 and DERBY-2264--we described > those incompatibilities at the end of the 10.3 release page: > http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/DerbyTenThreeRelease > > I don't see much discussion of DBO powers here. > > Regards, > -Rick -- Bernt Marius Johnsen, Database Technology Group, Staff Engineer, Technical Lead Derby/Java DB Sun Microsystems, Trondheim, Norway
pgpRseNFUXnPw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
