Re: Versioned vs unversioned jarfile names?

From: Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Versioned vs unversioned jarfile names?
Date: 2005-01-24 17:53:07
Message-ID: 41F53603.50402@fastcrypt.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

We could certainly provide symlinks with specific information. We do
have an interesting problem that most others don't ie API versions.

How about publishing them to jpackage.org ?

Dave

Tom Lane wrote:

>I have a request filed here:
>https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=145744
>to supply version-less symlinks for the JDBC jarfiles that are
>distributed in the Postgres RPMs. Does anyone have a comment
>on whether this is a good or bad idea?
>
>I personally thought that it would be better to use names that aren't
>totally versionless, but include some sort of major version number that
>indicates API level, or something like that. But I don't know what
>would be appropriate. Thoughts welcome.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
>
>
>
>

--
Dave Cramer
http://www.postgresintl.com
519 939 0336
ICQ#14675561

In response to

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jean-Pierre Pelletier 2005-01-24 18:30:40 setObject on PGInterval throws "Unknown Type null"
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-01-24 17:35:12 Versioned vs unversioned jarfile names?