commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [math] the 2.2 release saga conclusion ?
Date Fri, 11 Feb 2011 19:23:25 GMT
On 2/11/11 1:53 PM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Le 11/02/2011 19:07, Phil Steitz a écrit :
>> On 2/11/11 12:49 PM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I would like to have 2.2 out as soon as possible. I would like to
>>> propose yet another intermediate solution, not a perfect one, but trying
>>> to mitigate everything that has been said here. Remember this is *only*
>>> for 2.2 and it does *not* mean anything about 3.0 or any further
>>> discussions.
>>>
>>> So I propose we release 2.2 with the following changes relative to what
>>> is currently in the repository:
>>>
>>>  - change FunctionEvaluationException, DerivativeException and
>>>    MatrixVisitorException to unchecked again by making them
>>>    extend o.a.c.math.exception.MathUserException
>>>  - change ConvergenceException to unchecked by making it extend
>>>    o.a.c.math.exception.MathIllegalStateException
>>>  - undeprecate all these exceptions
>>>  - accept the 17 CLIRR errors remaining after these changes
>>>    (13 related to exceptions, 4 related to ODE)
>>>  - accept the 30 CLIRR warnings remaining after these changes
>>>    (all of them related to exceptions)
>>>  - accept the 422 CLIRR infos remaining after these changes
>>>
>>> This is by no means a perfect solution, I really tried to reach a
>>> compromise between several points of view. As each compromise, everyone
>>> would have something to tell against it but please don't start another
>>> lengthy discussion and even less a flame war. There is no hidden
>>> intention behind this and the choices presented would be put only in 2.2
>>> branch, not in trunk. The only intention is to be able to publish 2.2.
>>>
>>> What do you think ?
>>>
>> Can you create a Clirr report showing the issues above and put it in
>> ~luc so we can all look at it?
> Yes, I have put it there:
> <http://people.apache.org/~luc/clirr-report.html>.
>
>> Also, what would it take to fully eliminate the exceptions-related
>> errors?
> This would mean going back to checked exception as most errors are
> "Removed org.apache.commons.math.MathException from the list of
> superclasses"
So from the user perspective, the compatibility issue is that code
that catches MathException will in some cases propagate runtime
exceptions instead.   This sounds ridiculous, but what would be the
implications of just reverting the hierarchy so catching
MathException would work as before, but make MathException itself
unchecked?

Sorry if this seems to be walking into the kind of discussion you
did not want to reopen at this point; but I am just trying to see
what we might be able to do to prevent users having to make code
changes to have their apps that use 2.1 work safely in 2.2.

I will add at this point that if we just s/2.2/3.0 and s/3.0/4.0, I
am fine releasing as is.

Phil
> Luc
>
>> Phil
>>> Luc
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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
>
>


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


Mime
View raw message