commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Paul Benedict" <pbened...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [io] 2.0 Moving to minimum of JDK 1.5
Date Wed, 06 Feb 2008 16:37:00 GMT
I only mentioned starting at 1.0 again because I saw "Commons Lang Two 1.0"
listed in JIRA. It makes sense to me, although it is very awkward to digest.
:-) That's why I would rather advocate IO 2.0 keeping the same package
naming. No binary compatibility is guaranteed between major releases anyway.

Struts 2 chose a different package structure so that previous code (1.x) can
run side-by-side with the new product. If Commons IO can state that
intention, then having a new package structure has justification.

Paul

On Feb 6, 2008 10:04 AM, James Carman <james@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:

> On 2/6/08, Paul Benedict <pbenedict@apache.org> wrote:
> > Niall, I agree as well. I don't see a strong reason for keeping any
> > deprecations if the package structure is changing. It is no longer
> binary
> > compatible -- especially if you begin at version 1.0 again.
>
> Version 1.0?  So, it'd be org.apache.commons.io2, but the release
> would be version 1.0?  I don't know about that.  I'd think that
> anything packaged in io2 packages would be released under a 2.x
> release number.
>
> >
> > Paul
> >
> > On Feb 6, 2008 9:46 AM, Niall Pemberton <niall.pemberton@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Feb 6, 2008 1:44 PM, Simon Kitching <simon.kitching@chello.at>
> wrote:
> > > > ---- Stephen Colebourne <scolebourne@btopenworld.com> schrieb:
> > > > > Deprecation is useful when a method has been
> > > > > implemented incorrectly, and we want to push users
> > > > > to a replacement, or for similar issues. Removing deprecated
> > > > > classes/methods should be considered in a major version change,
> > > > > but even there we should question what the gain is. Having a
> > > > > 'nice and clean' no deprecations API release isn't sufficient a
> > > > > reason. We must always put the convenience of our users ahead of
> > > > > our natural refactoring and coding instincts.
> > > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > If a deprecated method is blocking significant improvement of the
> > > product, then ok remove it. But just to "clean up" is not really a
> good
> > > enough excuse.
> > >
> > > I don't mind the deprecations staying for IO 2.x - just thought that
> > > if there was going to be a package rename for JDK 1.5, then may as
> > > well clean up the deprecations as well. If, because of generic erasure
> > > IO 2.x isn't incompatible (except for the requirement for a higher JDK
> > > version) then how about retaining the current package name?
> > >
> > > Niall
> > >
> > > > > The problem is that there is no practical solution to a jar
> > > > > hell situation. Thus, it is our absolute responsibility to
> > > > > do everything in our power to avoid us being the cause of it.
> > > >
> > > > Over the last two weeks I've been working on embedding jspwiki into
> a
> > > locally developed application. Now jspwiki is compiled against Lucene
> > > 1.4.3, but the app already uses Lucene 2.3.0. And yep, they are
> > > incompatible (slightly, but enough).
> > > >
> > > > Fortunately jspwiki's search functionality is "pluggable" so by
> > > rewriting one jspwiki class I could make things work. But if the
> problem
> > > library had been more deeply embedded into the two systems I don't
> know what
> > > I could possibly have done.
> > > >
> > > > Of course if the new release was org.apache.lucene2, then there
> would be
> > > no problem.
> > > >
> > > > Compatibility is important.
> > > >
> > > > Regards, Simon
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message