| From: | Álvaro Hernández Tortosa <aht(at)8Kdata(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov(dot)vladimir(at)gmail(dot)com>, Markus KARG <markus(at)headcrashing(dot)eu> |
| Cc: | List <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SQLJSON |
| Date: | 2015-06-30 17:25:04 |
| Message-ID: | 5592D0F0.1030705@8Kdata.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
Thanks for asking for the double-check. No, indeed I'm still asking
to provide the class files for the API in the package. I feel that's the
right way, and I don't see it would create conflicts unless JSR353 would
create a new version, something which I believe extremely unlikely until
it merges with Java10 or JDBC5 comes out, point at which we would need
to change things anyway.
However, I don't want to insist more or suck more dev bandwitch,
that's my opinion and it's been stated more times than I wish, so I
would now leave the decision to the rest of you :)
Regards,
Alvaro
--
Álvaro Hernández Tortosa
-----------
8Kdata
On 30/06/15 18:49, Vladimir Sitnikov wrote:
> ah. I meant to double-check with Álvaro if he is suggesting compile
> type dependency.
>
> If he means that we in fact are discussing the same thing, so no
> contradiction exists.
>
>> However, regarding POLA you say "compile dependency" which means you
>> suggest _not_ including javax.json into pgjdbc.jar
>>
>> Álvaro , Can you please tell us if "using compile type dependency for both
>> javax.json and RI" suits you?
>>
> Vladimir
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Steven Schlansker | 2015-06-30 17:33:15 | Re: SQLJSON |
| Previous Message | Steven Schlansker | 2015-06-30 17:09:16 | Re: Adding new dependencies for in-core |