lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shai Erera <ser...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Proposal about Version API "relaxation"
Date Thu, 22 Apr 2010 14:23:40 GMT
I don't remember a release w/ an empty BW section in CHANGES ... and I think
it's healthy. Otherwise, you'll need to wait endlessly until a major version
is released until you can use some features that you, yourself, developed
(if you need to use a released Lucene and cannot satisfy w/ trunk).

Shai

On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Robert Muir <rcmuir@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Shai Erera <serera@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> But I thought that was the whole point - get rid of Version and loosen on
>> the bw policy to not be so restrictive on API. We can finally move to use
>> interfaces, stop that API refactoring and deprecation (as one said on a blog
>> - "orgy"). If we adopt Mike's proposal, where does it leave us - 99% of the
>> development double the efforts, and that tiny percentage like flex (even
>> though it's a huge feature in and on itself) having easier life?
>>
>> Perhaps I'm missing something, but if that's what is proposed and meant, I
>> think that not changing anything will (surprisingly and confusingly !) make
>> our life easier ...
>>
>> So Mark, I have to agree w/ you: "If we take that route, I am vehemently
>> against changing our policy." +1 !
>>
>> Shai
>>
>>
> I think its less than 1% (flex, etc) that should be excluded from stable,
> but thats my opinion.
>
> Ideally, stable would have no backwards-break section at all in CHANGES...
> and it seems this is a pretty significant portion of patches these days.
>
> And I don't think merging is "double effort" especially if we aren't doing
> risky crazy merges with hairy back compat.
>
> --
> Robert Muir
> rcmuir@gmail.com
>

Mime
View raw message