On Sat, 6 Oct 2007, Till Toenges wrote:
>> I think this is a good idea, but I would include a link to JDBC4 as well
>> because despite our poor support it is the way of the future.
>
> Ok.
While our support of JDBC4 is poor the JDBC4 driver at least does better
than the JDBC3 driver, so I've downplayed the JDBC4 weakness here and
simply mentioned which applies to which JVM.
>> I hoping we fold in the copy stuff so that disappears and until we have
>> some actual documentation/experience with the statement caching version,
>> I'm not sure how prominently I would like to promote it.
>
> I reduced that to just mentioning the extras page. Or should i remove it
> completely?
I've taken it out for the moment. If we don't get copy into the 8.3
release, or the caching driver generates some quality documentation and an
audience we can reconsider mentioning it, but for now we'll wait.
>> Yeah, since we don't even maintain 7.X anymore, mentioning 6.X and 0.2 is a
>> little pointless.
>
> There are two tables now, supported versions and archived versions. Is the
> split ok?
>
Looks good, current version here:
http://jdbc.postgresql.org/download.html
Kris Jurka
