Re: JDBC 4 Compliance

I think if you're looking to differentiate in the maven naming, you'd probably want to use a qualifier instead of changing the artifact id.  Using the qualifier, you can leave the stable driver as is and only add an "experimental" qualifier to the unstable new builds.
________________________________________
From: pgsql-jdbc-owner@postgresql.org [pgsql-jdbc-owner@postgresql.org] on behalf of Mike Fowler [mike@mlfowler.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2013 10:20 AM
To: Dave Cramer
Cc: Bryan Varner; List
Subject: Re: [JDBC] JDBC 4 Compliance

Hi Dave,

On 27/06/13 14:30, Dave Cramer wrote:
> I am coming to the conclusion that I should let new blood take over the
> postgresql driver. My lack of personal resources seems to be standing in
> the way of significant progress.
>
> Anyone interested in taking this on ?
>

I'm happy to help in this but might I suggest that rather than a single
individual take over that we get a group together? From the discussions
and list activity over the last little while I think there are a few
candidates but I do not wish to volunteer anyone for fear of missing and
offending people. Unless you really wish to step away from the JDBC, I'd
suggest you retain leadership and if you do wish to depart I'd ask that
you stay around and assist us in the transition.

The recurring plan that seems to be developing is to maintain the
current driver focusing on it's stability and compatibility. Going
forward the energy and focus would be towards a new driver which is
liberated from the concerns of backwards compatibility. Both sides of
the recent discussion have merits. Having recently moved on from an
employer where stability is king I was dealing with JDK 3 on occasion.
Incidentally, part of why I have moved on is that I do wish to do new
things!

Having already volunteered to work on getting the existing driver into
Maven I see the easiest way is to introduce two new artifact IDs.
Currently the artifact ID is simply postgresql but there is no reason we
couldn't use 'stable' and 'experimental' (experimental is the best I
could come up with off the top of my head!).

Long term we'll have to see whether we want to maintain two codebases.
For now let's experiment and see how things progress. There are pros and
cons to both codebases, neither are perfect. With that in mind this is
open source and people are free to do their own thing but there is
strength in numbers. We obviously all care about PostgreSQL and it's
JDBC driver so let us all try and make the best JDBC driver(s) possible!

Kind regards,
--
Mike Fowler
Registered Linux user: 379787


--
Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc


--
Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc