lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael McCandless <luc...@mikemccandless.com>
Subject Re: 2.9/3.0 plan & Java 1.5
Date Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:53:07 GMT

I can certainly see the benefit/temptation of the alternative "big  
bang" approach.

It's just not clear to me (yet) which way (big bang or not) we're  
planning to go, with 3.x.

Mike

Shai Erera wrote:

> I wonder why do we even have to deprecate ...
> A method like public void function( List<Term> list ) changes  
> nothing in terms of API. When people will move to 3.0, they'll have  
> to change their JDK anyway to 5 (if they haven't already done so).  
> Which means they had code like:
> function(List), and where List was not defined as generics. But  
> they'll get a warning anyway by the compiler, when they define List,  
> that it's not safe to create a list w/o defining its type.
>
> I think that when you move to 5 you have to change a lot of your  
> code anyway, so simply changing the Lucene API will not create too  
> much of a hassle for existing applications.
>
> Personally I'd hate to find out I have to change my entire  
> application because method/classes names were changed.
>
> Shai
>
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 1:44 PM, Michael McCandless <lucene@mikemccandless.com 
> > wrote:
>
> Ryan McKinley wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 12, 2008, at 5:18 AM, Michael McCandless wrote:
>
>
> Taking this to java-dev (off Jira)...
>
> Mark Miller (Jira) wrote:
>
> > I thought there were some that wanted to change some of the API to  
> java
> > 5 for the 3.0 release, cause I thought back compat was less  
> restricted
> > 2-3. I guess mabye that won't end up happening, if it was going  
> to, it
> > seems we'd want to deprecate what will be changed in 2.9.
>
> I could easily be confused on this... but I thought 3.0 is the first
> release that's allowed to include Java 1.5 only APIs (eg generics).
>
> Meaning, we could in theory intro APIs with generics with 3.0,
> deprecating the non-generics versions, and then 4.0 (sounds insanely
> far away!) would be the first release that could remove the deprecated
> non-generics versions?
>
> That said, I think the "plan" is to release 2.9 soonish (early next
> year?), and then fairly quickly turnaround a 3.0 that doesn't have too
> many changes except the removal of the deprecated (in 2.9) APIs.  Ie
> in practice it won't be until 3.1 when we would intro new
> (generics-based) APIs.
>
>
>
> What are examples of the deprecated non-generic APIs?
>
> My understanding would be that in 2.9 we have:
> public void function( List list );
> and in 3.0
> public void function( List<Term> list );
>
> How do you keep both functions around?
>
> We'd have to change the name?  Or deprecate the whole class  
> containing these methods (if there are lots of methods to  
> deprecate)?  Definitely something of a hassle.
>
> Mike
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message