jakarta-taglibs-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Martin Cooper" <martin.coo...@tumbleweed.com>
Subject RE: [String] stablizing release
Date Fri, 13 Sep 2002 19:08:31 GMT
+1 to all that.

--
Martin Cooper


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Timothy Kettering [mailto:timster@mac.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 13, 2002 7:23 AM
> To: Tag Libraries Developers List
> Subject: Re: [String] stablizing release
> 
> 
> Yeah.  I agree that since Strings hasn't hit 1.0 there's no 
> (technically) obligation to provide that functionality, after 
> all beta 
> software is subject to change, but I know I wouldn't be an 
> happy camper 
> if I found out that I had to scramble to find an obscure 
> nightly build 
> that would be the last build of the Strings Taglib Formerly Known As 
> Strings, and carefully archive that if I had built an entire web 
> application around it.
> 
> My opinion would be: Put out 1.0 release based on the current form, 
> just so that current users can have a final build to work with, then 
> advise users that development on Strings in that form will no longer 
> continue, and proceed with a 2.0 release with the refactored tags.  
> Maybe it makes us just as bad as MS/Netscape in the 
> version-incrementing game, but I think it's a lot more user-friendly 
> that way than putting the whammy on a lot of very surprised 
> users when 
> they find out their "1.1" Strings taglib binary download 
> reduced their 
> web application to a smoking mess of "500 - Servlet Exception" pages.
> 
> -tim
> 
> 
> On Friday, September 13, 2002, at 09:46 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> 
> >
> > Issues here are that generally when you make a 1.0 release you are
> > entering a backwards compatbility contract [or frequent arguments].
> >
> > With the changes I'd like, having functionality in two 
> places will be 
> > very
> > painful for users, but having the ones they've coded against vanish 
> > will
> > be even worse.
> >
> > It's probably a development vs user issue. Until I see a 
> 1.0, I don't 
> > feel
> > obliged to users to worry about backwards compatibility, but I'm 
> > probably
> > just fooling myself :)
> >
> > I'm happy with a 1.0 [though it depends on a beta of 
> commons-lang] and
> > then a 2.0, or a milestone-1, and then a 1.0.
> >
> > Hen
> >
> > On Fri, 13 Sep 2002, Tim Kettering wrote:
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> <mailto:taglibs-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
> <mailto:taglibs-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
> 
> 


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:taglibs-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:taglibs-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message