Re: Maven Artifact JDK Suffix

I thought of this as well. +1

Was there ever more then one JDBC release for a given JDK?

Dave Cramer

davec(at)postgresintl(dot)com
www.postgresintl.com

On 10 January 2016 at 19:02, Sehrope Sarkuni <sehrope(at)jackdb(dot)com> wrote:

> Why doesn't the JDK 8 version of the Maven artifact for the driver include
> the .jre8 suffix?
>
> Here's what's currently on the main README:
>
> <dependency>
> <groupId>org.postgresql</groupId>
> <artifactId>postgresql</artifactId>
> <version>9.4.1207</version> <!-- Java 8 -->
> <version>9.4.1207.jre7</version> <!-- Java 7 -->
> <version>9.4.1207.jre6</version> <!-- Java 6 -->
> </dependency>
>
>
> The other versions are JDK version suffixed and at some point there will
> be a JDK 9. Why not name it X.jre8 so that we're ready for when that day
> comes?
>
> Somewhat related, is it possible for more than one JDBC release to come
> out for the same JDK version or will that not happen anymore?
>
> If so, we'd be better off naming the releases off the JDBC version (ex:
> 9.4.127.jdbc42). Each JDBC version already has a min supported JDK version
> associated with it (ex: JDBC 4.2 requires JDK 8+) so it's super set of
> tracking JDK versions. Then again, if the days of JDBC updates out of band
> from JDK updates are gone, it's just extra noise/confusion (vs. tracking
> against the JDK version).
>
> Regards,
> -- Sehrope Sarkuni
> Founder & CEO | JackDB, Inc. | https://www.jackdb.com/
>
>