LSARC/2008/059 - SQLite

[James Carlson]

Nicolas Williams writes:
> On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 03:51:37PM -0500, James Carlson wrote:
> > Brian Cameron writes:
> > > I believe the main reason the JDS team wants these interfaces to be
> > > Volatile is so that other Sun groups that wish to depend on the
> > > interfaces sign contracts with us.  This way the JDS team can manage
> > 
> > In that case, make them either Project or Consolidation Private.
> > That'll result in the most difficulty for other projects, as they'll
> > all need contracts.
> 
> Brian was right though: Volatile is "public and unstable for folks
> outside the WOS" and "consolidation private for better-than-volatile
> consumers in the WOS" (my rough translation of what the taxonomy says).
> I still think it's better to go with Uncommitted, but I'll live.

True, but if they're doing this because they're worried about making
fixes for other consumers inside the WOS, what chance does any of
those customers, enticed by the presence of this well-known but
Volatile interface, have?

My understanding of the taxonomy is that it's primarily there to allow
us to tell people how interfaces might change over time, and thus the
risks in using them, and not that we're concerned about or just unable
to support them when used.

Equating a higher (or a lower) stability level with a generic promise
of support seems like an error to me.

-- 
James Carlson, Solaris Networking              <james.d.carlson at sun.com>
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive        71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677