db-torque-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Greg Monroe" <Greg.Mon...@DukeCE.com>
Subject RE: 3.3-RC3, was: Re: village
Date Mon, 09 Jul 2007 16:00:33 GMT
Just getting back from a short holiday (US July 4th) and
catching up.

One thing that comes to mind about changing package names
is the potential need to for backward compatiblity.  One 
of the main reasons to "adopt" Village is so that the 
source that all versions of Torque depends on is not lost.
IMHO, if we change package names, we still have to find a
place to keep the original source "alive".

That said, I'd say that the question is not about packaging
for the license.  Isn't it just a license like GPL, etc?  Any
code, regardless of Apache.org affiliation, can have this 

So, IMHO, the question is:  

Does all source code that is distributed from the Apache.org 
domain have to have this package convention?

That said, I'd say the best way to import this would be to 
create a new Village sub project and put it there.  This 
was probably the unstated plan... but I figured I'd say it.

I'd also vote for deprecating this project for V4.0 and 
rolling any parts we might still need into the Runtime 
project under org.apache.torque.?? package(s).  

Oh, and while we're talking about possible Village tweaks, 
somewhere, I've got a small patch that lets Derby's JDBC 
driver work with Village.  If I remember right it has to
do with Village asking the JDBC driver if a column is 
Read/Only and Derby always returning true (while all 
other JDBC drivers return false).  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Vandahl [mailto:tv@apache.org] 
> Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2007 6:17 AM
> To: Apache Torque Developers List
> Subject: Re: 3.3-RC3, was: Re: village
> Scott Eade wrote:
> > Since Torque is the responsibility of the DB PMC I will 
> raise this on 
> > general@ so that there is an opportunity for objections to 
> be raised there.
> I'm afraid general@db is pretty much dead. My announcement of 
> the last RC-release went there completely unnoticed. I'll ask 
> on private@db instead.
> In general the whole question boils down to: Is it mandatory 
> for ASF licensed classes to be in sub-packages of "org.apache"?
> Bye, Thomas
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org
DukeCE Privacy Statement:
Please be advised that this e-mail and any files transmitted with
it are confidential communication or may otherwise be privileged or
confidential and are intended solely for the individual or entity
to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient
you may not rely on the contents of this email or any attachments,
and we ask that you please not read, copy or retransmit this
communication, but reply to the sender and destroy the email, its
contents, and all copies thereof immediately. Any unauthorized
dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is
strictly prohibited.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org

View raw message