| From: | Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov(dot)vladimir(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Sehrope Sarkuni <sehrope(at)jackdb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Mark Rotteveel <mark(at)lawinegevaar(dot)nl>, Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)gmail(dot)com>, List <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Maven Artifact JDK Suffix |
| Date: | 2016-01-13 21:54:04 |
| Message-ID: | CAB=Je-GNyGptoOJsD99Ag6pvGTr5gZ66xSqPZGXXEPkSwHcchA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
>[2]: 9.4.1210.jre7 > 9.4.1207.jre8
So what is the problem with that?
I do not think there is a "proper" way to compare 1210.jre7 vs 1207.jre8.
I do not think it outweights "multiartifact" drawbacks I list below.
What I fear is java 10 when we would hit a string literal comparison wall.
Thus we might want use jre07, jre08, jre09 to be prepared for jre10 :)
> They're entirely different artifacts
They are not.
For instance: is it sane to include _both_ artifacts at the same time?
I do not think so.
Having different artifact ids would:
1) Open can of worms with "multiple pgjdbc artifacts at the same time".
2) Make upgrading pgjdbc very hard.
If jreX is a part of version, then you can define the version in
parent pom, and all the child projects just inherit it.
You can easily flip version back and forth by altering version in parent.
If jreX is artifact id, then you would have to change all the child
projects to use updated artifact id.
Vladimir
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Enrico Olivelli - Diennea | 2016-01-14 09:37:27 | R: Error on setAutoCommit with 9.4.1207 |
| Previous Message | Devrim GÜNDÜZ | 2016-01-13 18:23:39 | Re: [pgjdbc] Implement JDBC specs via pre-processor step (#435) |