db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew McIntyre" <mcintyr...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Should we vote on it? (was Re: Discussion (in preparation for a vote) on interface stability table)
Date Thu, 30 Mar 2006 21:54:31 GMT
On 3/30/06, David W. Van Couvering <David.Vancouvering@sun.com> wrote:
> It's been awfully quiet out there.  Are there really no other opinions
> about this.  One little peep from Dan and another from Kathey, and we're
> done?  Is this the derby-dev alias I know and love?

:-) sorry, I've been distracted by other things.

Do you have a definition for "incompatible change"? Can you describe
what threshold a change has to cross to be an "incompatible change",
and how that is measured? Is it a result of tests, running tools, or
what? I'd like to see a more firm definition of that term.

Just on first glance the table is fairly restrictive, but generally
looks good. I would think that environment variables and install
directory hierarchy would be marked unstable, since it seems
reasonable that we could change our use of environment variables
(since they're only used in the scripts) or move things around in the
distributions between minor releases.

In general, I like it. It looks like it should lead to more sensible
deprecation of unused or changing features. I'm curious if others feel
that only removing deprecated features at major release boundaries is
a requirement, or if "keep for x number of releases" might be
acceptable.

andrew

Mime
View raw message