gump-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Bodewig <>
Subject Re: Is Gump the obsticle?
Date Sun, 19 Feb 2006 09:32:57 GMT
On Sun, 19 Feb 2006, Steve <> wrote:

> Incompatible version changes arise from:
>    (a) development errors
>    (b) planned version change typically flagged
>        by a major version identifier increment
> The first is something we want to trap


> while the second is something managed and intentional.

Exactly.  And we deal with it the way Bill described.  We build dom4j
HEAD separately from the branch that most projects depend on, we've
built different branches of commons-httpclient, for example.

I fully agree that sometimes there may be a good reason to break
backwards compatibility.  And Gump should certainly be able to deal
with it (and in most cases it is).


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

View raw message