commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Julius Davies <juliusdav...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [codec] Moving on to codec 2.0
Date Fri, 01 Apr 2011 02:21:24 GMT
>> >> Nothing of this (including minimum requirement of Java 5) requires
>> >> automatically 2.x. As long as the API is *upward* binary compatible, you
>> >> can
>> >> improve the implementation using this features, adding new methods or
>> new
>> >> classes. Even generics can be added to some extend in a binary
>> compatible
>> >> way. This has been done for dbcp and there we deliver due to JDBC 3/4
>> even
>> >> two versions.
>> >>
>> >
>> > I feels like jumping to Java 5 is important enough to go to calling it
>> 2.0.
>>
>> +1 agreed; it's a non-trivial change to introduce generics.
>>
>> > We could keep it 1.6 until something breaks...
>>
>> Dunno  what you mean by that.
>>
>
> I thought that we could call it 1.6 until a break in API would justify 2.0.
>
> But, nevermind, because I think we all agree on calling it 2.0 with Java 5.
>
> Gary
>
>

Or let's use Sun style versioning, and call the next version 6.0 !!!
(while still calling it 1.6 in the tag...)

;-) ;-) ;-)

ps. Just to avoid confusion with my silly joke, I am +1 to Java5 and
calling it 2.0 and trying our utmost to preserve drop-in reverse
compatibility.

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


Mime
View raw message