commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Henri Yandell" <>
Subject Re: [lang] Java 5
Date Fri, 20 Jun 2008 15:42:44 GMT
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 5:05 AM, sebb <> wrote:
> On 12/06/2008, James Carman <> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 7:28 AM, Niall Pemberton
>> <> wrote:
>> >> Do you mean that the removal of the enums would mean that we have to
>>  >> change package names?
>>  >>
>>  >> Would class/interface removals necessitate a
>>  >> package name change?  I haven't really thought that through.
>>  >
>>  > Perhaps not, neither had I
>>  >
> Removal of a *public* interface/method/class means that the API is not
> compatible, as it is not possible to replace the jar without breaking
> classes that use these items.

I think we need to make a final decision on this.

There seems little argument against moving to 1.5 in theory. And no
one is concerned with using 1.5 features in new development. The one
open question is: "Should we rename the package"?

* If we goto 1.5, we have to remove the enum package. It's been
deprecated for a good while and a source code fix is very easy. Any
client that is 1.5 based has had to remove it already.

* We have a handful of other deprecated methods that we've said will
be removed in 3.0. We've removed methods in the past (I'm pretty sure
we did that for 2.0).

I'm 50/50 right now. On the one hand, yes I think we should remove
things and it's not a major version problem. If people are having pain
it would be very easy to build a separate jar with the deprecated
methods. However.... if we are going to start writing new generics
code etc, it is going to be impossible to manage to keep that separate
from the existing code. How will people know what to code where?

In which case I think we should just dive right into LangTwo now. svn
cp the trunk to a branch for maintenance, and release of the current
bugfixes if we ever need to, and start a new LangTwo on the current

Gump btw is going to go mad :) It'll think we're breaking compatibility.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message