commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <>
Subject Re: [JCS] release?
Date Thu, 16 Oct 2014 11:48:29 GMT
On 16 October 2014 09:35, Thomas Vandahl <> wrote:
> On 16.10.14 02:06, sebb wrote:
>> On 16 October 2014 00:47, Olivier Lamy <> wrote:
>>> Perso I don' get the point to use this version number at the end of
>>> the artifactId
>> The idea is that if the package name has to be changed again, i.e. to
>> org.apache.commons.jcs2, then the artifactId would become commons-jcs2
>> so that they agree with each other.
> I consider this rule a bit strict, to be frank. I'd like to think that
> the problem of a broken API could be solved differently (by deliberately
> renaming API classes for example) but i can live with it for now.

Renaming API classes will break compatibility unless one keeps the old
classes as well.

Creating new classes and deprecating the old ones is a valid strategy,
but if one ever wants to get rid of the deprecated classes, it is
necessary to make a complete break.

It is essential that a given class name only appears in a single Maven
(groupId,artifactId) pair, otherwise jar hell may result.
It is also essential that within a Maven pair, classes are not dropped
between versions (unless the class is not part of the public API)
otherwise there will be binary compatibility issues.

> Bye, Thomas.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message