Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: domain of mfncooper@gmail.com
 designates 64.233.184.206 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references;
        b=Jfr/t2cQNIENg9++aIouAmzplu6fFUbw94eTad84Eh4Sgc1haUPA72gob4y1k5TYwuAZ2NVjoVJDp2xy7hrARydZywiNZs3yB4x441KfcWwIf/ueloVI5rSaDciacvaEzKrGsPGsXFRktIEY8qxDwRsUroTtqLPvWe2AbMxp8RQ=
Message-ID: <16d6c620041122131423802c40@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:14:11 -0800
From: Martin Cooper <mfncooper@gmail.com>
Reply-To: Martin Cooper <mfncooper@gmail.com>
To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Chain 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1101155847.5661.51.camel@pcsimon>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <20041121145254.T752@minotaur.apache.org>
	 <009201c4d047$292fa420$0302a8c0@mattlaptop>
	 <16d6c62004112123394c3ceac7@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1101155847.5661.51.camel@pcsimon>

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 09:37:27 +1300, Simon Kitching
<simon@ecnetwork.co.nz> wrote:
> Hi Martin,
> 
> On Mon, 2004-11-22 at 20:39, Martin Cooper wrote:
> > This sounds like an enhancement request to me. Are you really
> > suggesting that Chain should not be released until your specific
> > enhancement is endorsed and incorporated into the component? I'm
> > afraid I, for one, can't sign up for that.
> 
> I think Matt's comment was entirely reasonable. The whole point of a 1.0
> release is to "freeze" the API. If the API isn't right, then people
> certainly should speak up *before* the API freeze.

You're right, of course.

> Of course it is better to speak up well before then if possible, but a
> release proposal is bound to prompt people to get around to voicing that
> concern they have had kicking around in the back of their mind for a
> while. Anyone raising the prospect of a release should be expecting this
> sort of thing.

I was (over)reacting to exactly that. Chain was promoted out of the
sandbox almost 6 months ago, so seeing such a fundamental change being
proposed at this point was a bit like a bolt from the blue.

Matt, I apologise for jumping down your throat.

> It looks to me, as an outsider, like the concensus is that the existing
> interface *is* ok, but as a commons committer I hope that everyone will
> give it serious consideration, and not ignore it as "too late". It is
> perfectly valid to change APIs before 1.0 (keeping compatibility is
> *desirable* but not mandatory). It's certainly better than being stuck
> with the wrong API post-1.0.

Agreed. I have first hand experience of dealing with a poor API being
exposed in a release...

--
Martin Cooper


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

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