Chris, On 9/24/2010 7:24 AM, Christopher Schultz wrote:
> What issues are you thinking of, specifically. These? > http://people.apache.org/~fhanik/jdbc-pool/jdbc-pool.html Googling around shows many complaints about multithreaded behavior and connection dropping. Which (to me) suggests at least pockets of instability. > The biggest problem with C3P0 is that it's unsupported (I heard... I > can't find anywhere that it says the project is actually dead, but it's > been over 3 years since their last release, and it's clearly labeled > "beta"). It looks like they might be thinking about another point > release. Unsupported (or weakly supported) is likely a deal breaker for us. > What's wrong with LGPL? I'm not trying to start a holy war... just > curious about your objections. Our legal department detests LGPL (lack of case law scares lawyers - nobody wants to BE the case law) and getting approval to use anything LGPL is near impossible. In some cases, for well known products (say Hibernate) our company has made legal arrangements with the owner (I don't know details, just that "something's been done"). I don't necessarily agree with the rules, I just have to follow them. > > The "feature page" of the tomcat connection pool > > (http://people.apache.org/~fhanik/jdbc-pool/jdbc-pool.html) seems > > quite promising, but to be honest, it concerns me that the module is > > only readily available from a commiter's pages or from source. > > That is a shame. Which part is a shame? That I don't want to propose we put big $$$ at risk on a component that does not have a solid community of support, or that the community hasn't supported a promising component? NB: I'm not passing any judgement on the component itself, but a criterion for us to pull in FOSS is the level of community support etc. --Jason This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement, you may review at http://www.amdocs.com/email_disclaimer.asp
