commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [JEXL] Jexl 2.1?
Date Fri, 02 Dec 2011 21:38:17 GMT
On 2 December 2011 19:40, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 1:19 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2 December 2011 17:52, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > +1. to release early, release often.
>>
>> But I hope we don't want to break user applications.
>>
>> > Go for v3, seems simplest.
>>
>> Simpler for whom?
>>
>
> Simpler for people to use the latest version with new features. Users have

If the new features can be released without requiring code changes,
then surely that is simpler?

> to make a conscious decision to upgrade to a new release, there is no
> coercion. A new release, in 2.x or 3.x carries different migration costs.
> If the new features of a 3.x matter to me, I accept the costs. If the
> releasing a new feature is incompatible in 2.x, I have to deal getting it
> in a 3.x with package name changes (and any other breakage.)

Exactly, 3.x is more expensive than 2.x, so we should try to avoid
unnecessary breakages.

> Gary
>
>
>>
>> We could always release major versions with package and Maven id
>> changes, and then compatibility issues would be irrelevant.
>>
>> However, would most end users want that?
>> (JDBC versions, anyone?)
>>
>> Assuming that there are many more users of the code than there are
>> developers, then I think the developers owe it to the users not to
>> break things unnecessarily.
>> Particularly for projects such as Commons, which are generally only a
>> small part of a larger application.
>> Projects like Tomcat or JMeter which are largely self-contained can
>> afford to make many more internal changes, but they still need to
>> ensure upwards compatibility as far as possible.
>>
>> > If someone really wants fixes in 2.x, then you release from the branch.
>>
>> The reason I started on this was to see if we could tweak the code
>> sufficiently to avoid having to do a major version release.
>> I think we are nearly there.
>>
>> So yes, more work for the developers, but a lot less hassle for most end
>> users.
>>
>> > Gary
>> >
>> > On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 12:27 PM, henrib <henrib@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I've done the same thing and been pushing JEXL snapshots for sometime to
>> >> avoid the unpleasant moment, so unpleasant that I've procrastinated
>> enough
>> >> to now have to consider alternatives.
>> >> I find disturbing that committers fear to release and that goodwill to
>> >> share
>> >> features and code is killed by the process that should help publish
>> them -
>> >> not oppose them!
>> >>
>> >> I agree that a "release early, release often" scheme would help but
>> I've no
>> >> idea how to achieve this without a "release faster" mean.
>> >>
>> >> However, I ultimately suspect that the vested interest of some in
>> promoting
>> >> a hard, difficult and lengthy process relates to how their bills get
>> payed
>> >> and by whom; there is a huge difference in those of us doing this as a
>> >> "goodwill hobby" - so to speak - because we feel it is good ethics to
>> >> contribute back and those who make a living from it. Can't blame them
>> for
>> >> making sure their fees stay high by ensuring "hobbyists" don't get too
>> >> efficient! (just kidding :-))
>> >>
>> >> Cheers,
>> >> Henrib
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> View this message in context:
>> >>
>> http://apache-commons.680414.n4.nabble.com/JEXL-Jexl-2-1-tp4147180p4148135.html
>> >> Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>> > JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0
>> > Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>> > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> > Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0
> Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

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


Mime
View raw message