commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 1.10 based on RC2
Date Sat, 31 Jan 2015 11:48:07 GMT
On 31 January 2015 at 11:41, Stefan Bodewig <bodewig@apache.org> wrote:
> On 2015-01-31, sebb wrote:
>
>> On 31 January 2015 at 09:03, Stefan Bodewig <bodewig@apache.org> wrote:
>>> On 2015-01-31, sebb wrote:
>
>>>> Given that the protected fields were in a class marked as internal, it
>>>> seems arguable that users should not have referred to any of the items
>>>> in it.
>>>> Therefore we could potentially make all the mutable protected fields
>>>> private (and add protected getters).
>
>>> Even if the class was marked internal ZCompressorInputStream which
>>> inherits said fields was not.  Subclasses of ZCompressorInputStream
>>> would be broken if we changed the fields now, I'm afraid it is too late
>>> already.
>
>> The question is - would external subclasses need to access all these
>> fields?  If this is considered very unlikely, it might be worth
>> privatising them now.
>
> at the price of a -1 by somebody else for breaking backwards
> compatibility :-)

Well of course it would need to be agreed in advance.

Although BC compatibiity is vitally important, if a breaking change
only affects internal code I would hope devs would agree that it is OK
to break it in such cases.

> Stefan
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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