harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Anton Avtamonov" <anton.avtamo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [doc] Compatibility guidelines
Date Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:19:31 GMT
On 4/25/06, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com> wrote:
> Anton Avtamonov wrote:
> > Tim, that is excellent! Thank you.
> >
> > I have couple of minor questions:
> >
> > Am I right with interpretation that the primary "source" is the spec
> > rather than RI behavior? If the spec is consistent and logical, but
> > contradicts to the RI behavior we are basing on spec? I'm asking just
> > because that caused lots of debates last time and I want to make sure
> > everyone agreed with this statement now.
>
> That's what I thought we agreed.  If the guide does not make that clear
> then I am happy to clarify.

Guidelines clearly mentioned that. I could not recall if everyone was
agree or not :-).
As I remember there were lots of people who proposed to base on RI
behavior only (to be as much comatible as possible).

Personally I'm completely agree with guidelines approach.

>
> > Another minor comment regarding to the serialization compatibility:
> > What if serialization form is not specified and the spec states that
> > serialization form will not be compatible with future releases? Does
> > it mean we want to copy the existing serialization form? Or we are
> > going to define our own? Should it be reflected in the guidelines?
>
> I suggest that we copy the current RI form (if we can deduce it
> honestly) to get better interoperability.

+1.

--
Anton Avtamonov,
Intel Middleware Products Division

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message