Re: Derby and Java SE (was: Spring/hibernate and JDBC)
Stefan Ram wrote:
lewbloch writes:
Derby is free to distribute and not always needed in every JRE
installation, so why include it for the grand majority of users who
don't need it?
Java SE 6u10 is only loading=B9 a 4.5 MB kernel of the 15 MB Java SE,
and more changes in this direction are intended. So I was hoping
that it might be possible today or in the near future to download
Derby on demand. But even if this would not be possible: A decent
means to store data in a database is essential for so many applicatio=
ns
that it even would be worth an increase in the size of Java SE.
1http://blogs.oracle.com/theplanetarium/entry/project_jigsaw_modulari=
z...
"A decent means to store data in a database" != "Derby".
Your statements don't speak to my point. It may be that Derby is a
member of the set of "decent means to store data", but it's not the
only member. Leaving the question of why to include Derby for every
user whether they need it or not.
To include Derby for every user, when some apps use SQL Lite, some use
Derby, some use something else entirely, is not optimal. Presumably
that's the reason why, like so much else in the JDK, it's not in the
JRE. You don't get other parts of the JDK either.
--
Lew