Re: [gtk-list] Re: GNOME Database kit ODBC interface

[Elliot Lee <sopwith redhat com>]

On Fri, 7 Aug 1998, Ian McKellar wrote:

> Having read the JDBC book and having spoken to people who've had to use it
> it sounds pretty horrific.

I don't do Java :) How does JDBC compare to ODBC?

> And with industry standards: just because its an industry standard doesn't
> mean its good - for example:
>   Industry standard desktop OS:	    Windows9[58]
>   Industry standard server OS:      WindowsNT
>   Industry standard X11 Desktop:    CDE
>   Industry standard X11 Toolkit:    Motif
> 
> If someone is going to be using GNOME then they're not going to be concerning
> themselves with the "industry standard".

Agreed, but that doesn't mean we have to revolt against industry standards
just because they are such, though. 

> How about we rip off the API for JDBC, and implement it over CORBA. This
> could work because:
>   * the JDBC api is pretty good.

I thought you said it was horrific...?

>   * it would be easy to write a Java 1.2 GDBC -> JDBC bridge, and hence use 
>     the JDBC -> ODBC bridge.
>   * virtually all significant database vendors have written JDBC drivers.
>   * if we base our API on JDBC, then it would be easy for database vendors to
>     rewrite their JDBC drivers for our GNOME standard.

Is JDBC a wire protocol or a Java database API?

Provide URL's, and I will read :)

>   * JDBC is emering as an industry standard :)

"emerging" != "is"

We could always use the "industry standard" OMG database spec, but that'd
be just another potion to add to the brew,
-- Elliot