Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [209.114.166.2])
	by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA36041;
	Tue, 2 May 2000 13:28:00 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA04499;
	Tue, 2 May 2000 13:27:42 -0400 (EDT)
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
cc: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>,
	Peter Mount <petermount@it.maidstone.gov.uk>,
	Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org>,
	PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
	PostgreSQL-interfaces <pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org>,
	"Peter Mount (Home)" <peter@retep.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Request for 7.0 JDBC status 
In-reply-to: <200005021643.MAA20306@candle.pha.pa.us> 
References: <200005021643.MAA20306@candle.pha.pa.us>
Comments: In-reply-to Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
	message dated "Tue, 02 May 2000 12:43:03 -0400"
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 13:27:42 -0400
Message-ID: <4496.957288462@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Archive-Number: 200005/36

Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
>> Relevant question: how well does the JDBC code that's in CVS now
>> work with 7.0?  If the answer is "hardly at all" then a new driver
>> is probably better even if it has lurking bugs.  If the answer is
>> "pretty well" then again I'd be inclined to ship what we've got.

> As far as I know, no one has it yet, except Thomas.  The driver must
> have a domain of org.postgresql or it is the old version.  Only since I
> installed Peter's Makefile last week did it become install-able.

So the version currently in CVS has seen hardly any testing either?
Man, you really know how to make a guy feel comfortable :-(

Given that, we might as well let Peter have the extra day or two
to bring the CVS version to the best state he can.

			regards, tom lane