commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Henri Yandell" <flame...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [lang] 3.0 thoughts again
Date Thu, 15 Feb 2007 17:02:04 GMT
On 2/15/07, Stephen Colebourne <scolebourne@btopenworld.com> wrote:
> I'd like to know how much of 2.x is deprecated.

Needs investigation - but I'd like to be bold on it.

So enum package would be removed and enums package would be deprecated
as it has a JDK replacement. We would then add functionality around
the JDK enums to provide some/all of the value back.

> We may need 3.x to be JDK1.3 compatible but without the deprecations.

Presumably we would add the new deprecations at this point.

> And thus 4.x () to be JDK1.5.
>
> Anyway, for me, the project and version number should depend on compatibility.
>
> We shouldn't release any new version, even of a major version number, that isn't fully
binary
> compatible. The only thing we can do is remove deprecated methods. (Adding generics can
be
> binary compatible)

Adding binary compatible generics is a pain in the arse though, right?

Hen

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


Mime
View raw message