Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B828D7A03 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 20:38:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 13877 invoked by uid 500); 11 Aug 2011 20:38:57 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@commons.apache.org Received: (qmail 13752 invoked by uid 500); 11 Aug 2011 20:38:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@commons.apache.org Received: (qmail 13744 invoked by uid 99); 11 Aug 2011 20:38:56 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 20:38:56 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of sebbaz@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.171 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.220.171] (HELO mail-vx0-f171.google.com) (209.85.220.171) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 20:38:48 +0000 Received: by vxh13 with SMTP id 13so2276044vxh.30 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 13:38:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=pZWSTtKa048+TrSlSuXH0y2H0ojA3//jYqi/+bIwYr0=; b=J2GUaXV/sCQvJYiidqXjLnzoBDM5FvbhTLgHsG+sFlDTtlzM5V6Bp7pg8pmBQCowf/ himum+hWWXtFqsymqAQ4w9rPmGv6vh/gH8yxbQehmXX0SYis0c5/1nzZEdIef4DYouAM uzP2/UTHK0iDNza1jBDFKNopfC2NFpl1Yn5/I= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.23.50 with SMTP id j18mr50712vdf.484.1313095107953; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 13:38:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.176.1 with HTTP; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 13:38:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 21:38:27 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [codec] getting the bmpm code out there From: sebb To: Commons Developers List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 11 August 2011 20:55, Matthew Pocock wrote: > Hi Sebb, > > >> The reason I raised the issue was that the API seems to be currently >> in a state of flux. >> > > The BMPM code has not appeared in a previous release. It is a discrete > addition that doesn't alter any existing code, and as far as I know, > currently no 3rd party code relies upon it. Right now on trunk, it is a > StringEncoder. OK > >> In this case, because the BMPM code is new, it might be possible to >> relax the requirement somewhat, so long as the code API is documented >> as being unstable. >> > > I've no problem with marking it as new or unstable or whatever the right > word is. While it extends StringEncoder, the API is stable. Although there > may be more flux with the finer details of the string you get out for the > string you put in as we fix bugs and update the rule tables, this shouldn't > alter how clients (users of the API) call this code, only the quality of the > results they get back. OK, that won't affect binary compat. > >> >> If we do have to change BMPM in a way that is not binary compatible, >> then all code that uses the BMPM classes will need to be updated. >> > > Understood. I think this only becomes an issue if/when Encoder becomes > generified, and at that point clearly we need a big version bump, with all > the associated changes, and all encoders and their clients would be equally > affected. Indeed. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org