commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Davey <Michael.Da...@CodeRage.ORG>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release 2.1 of commons collections
Date Fri, 18 Oct 2002 12:23:59 GMT
scolebourne@btopenworld.com wrote:
> Henri Yandell wrote:
>>>2.  In the binary distribution (both .zip and .tar.gz), the
>>>commons-collections.jar contains a Manifest.mf that lists:
>>>Specification-Version: 1.0
>>>Implementation-Version: 2.0
>>
>>Imp Version done.
>>Spec Version not done. Any suggestions on what it should be? 2.0? 2.1?
>>Following the format of Collections 1, I think it would be 1.0.
> 
> I would have gussed that the spec version does rise, unless the release is bug fixes
only. Thus this should be 2.1.

Have any non-private fields, methods or classes been removed since last release? 
  Have new methods been added to interfaces since last release?  Has the 
contract of any non-private class, method or function changed in a way that is 
not backwardly compatible?  If the answer to one or more of the questions is 
"yes", then the spec version should increment IMO.

In other words:

   o  an implementation of this version of the specification must be mutually 
binary compatible with previous implementations of this version of the specification

   o  the implementation contract must be backwards compatible with previous 
implementation contracts for this version of the specification

...for the specification version to remain unchanged.

"binary compatible" is defined and described here...
http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jls/second_edition/html/binaryComp.doc.html#44872

-- 
Michael



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


Mime
View raw message