db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Levitt <de...@mylevita.com>
Subject Re: Should we vote on it? (was Re: Discussion (in preparation for a vote) on interface stability table)
Date Tue, 04 Apr 2006 02:38:28 GMT


--- "David W. Van Couvering"
<David.Vancouvering@Sun.COM> wrote:

> I agree that you can't really advertise a new
> feature as really 
> available unless it's documented, and that in this
> scratch-your-itch 
> world, this would seem to be something that the
> person writing the 
> feature would be motivated to do.   I think having a
> requirement that 
> some specification is required before an interface
> is considered public 
> is worth considering.  Of course, the other people
> who may be itching to 
> document a feature are those who want to use it, so
> I could imagine it 
> being a collaborative effort.
> 
> I can add a note to the effect that "no interface
> can be considered a 
> public interface (e.g. Stable, Unstable or Standard)
> unless it is 
> documented in the user documentation".  Would this
> get the point across?
> 
> David

Thats a huge step in the right direction.  It states
in writing the link between documentation and
stability.  Perhaps the next step would be linking the
documentation in the developer's mind to their code,
so that both are one and the same.

Mime
View raw message