commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "James Carman" <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>
Subject Re: [io] 2.0 Moving to minimum of JDK 1.5
Date Fri, 08 Feb 2008 13:49:45 GMT
So, you are suggesting having part of a release in the o.a.c.io
package and the other part in the o.a.c.io2?  It seems rather
inconsistent, but I guess it would work.   Isn't that going to get
ugly with 3.x and 4.x releases adding to the mix?

On 2/8/08, Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Feb 6, 2008 1:51 PM, Niall Pemberton <niall.pemberton@gmail.com> wrote:
> > So the changes are pretty minimal for IO - question is are these
> > incompatible changes with generics being erased? If not then perhaps
> > we can do this without breaking anything.
>
> +1 If there are cases where we can't avoid breaking backwards
> compatibility, then let's use the name2 pattern on individual classes
> or interfaces instead of the entire o.a.c.io package. There are large
> parts of Commons IO that don't need to change when upgrading to Java 5
> and I don't see why a client that only uses those parts should be
> affected in any way by the upgrade.
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
View raw message