avalon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Berin Loritsch <blorit...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Oficial Policy For Component Interfaces
Date Fri, 28 Dec 2001 19:43:39 GMT
Paul Hammant wrote:

> Berin,
> 
>> Concidering the fact that most Avalon systems automatically determine 
>> the lifecycles
>> of the components, I am wondering if we should strive to maintain 100% 
>> backwards
>> compatibility for lifecycle interfaces.  The issue is brought to light 
>> due to the
>> LogEnabled interface.
>>
>>
>>
>> Should it be concidered backwards compatible for a *Component* to 
>> change it's lifecycle
>> interfaces? 
> 
> 
> Err sorry to be pedandtic, but do you mean ...
> 
>    Should it be a goal for Components to maintain backwards 
> compatibility of their lifecycle interfaces?
> 
> OR
> 
>   Is the changing of lifecycle interfaces considered to be backwards 
> compatible?


Either way the effect is the same.

Should I have the ability to change a lifecycle interface without it being
concidered backwards incompatible.


> 
>> This does not apply to regular classes and containers.  This is only 
>> for Components,
> 
> 
> And only, mostly to Excalibur I guess.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> - Paul H
> 
> 
> -- 
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> <mailto:avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
> <mailto:avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
> 
> .
> 



-- 

"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
  deserve neither liberty nor safety."
                 - Benjamin Franklin


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message