Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 46058 invoked from network); 22 Apr 2010 19:26:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 22 Apr 2010 19:26:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 609 invoked by uid 500); 22 Apr 2010 19:26:43 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 566 invoked by uid 500); 22 Apr 2010 19:26:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 559 invoked by uid 99); 22 Apr 2010 19:26:43 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 19:26:43 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.1 required=10.0 tests=AWL,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of earwin@gmail.com designates 209.85.218.211 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.218.211] (HELO mail-bw0-f211.google.com) (209.85.218.211) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 19:26:36 +0000 Received: by bwz3 with SMTP id 3so8318114bwz.11 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 12:26:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:received:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=F26Q0RS5WUkb7/liW7B+vjKE2D2kd6avvg5sxtXvpUk=; b=BmPQRMj6EIgu0wInguSfWNObBWJHfrk/vI+UJwyWEnMI3pi9i2vRDG3JEjdibU9E1p Na9oCRMj+1F3hW8qOxlGcfGyC8gY2WWtlbeWdrs2gDK9wjrSTDENTRZHSWQj7BVCeYwa Srq7eBeerIung8Scd/iA8/nnOLznFrApfysNc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=b3aVOdvSh50famR0sTdjC/IMAFYQ9OsvnbHSozP5ttndgFllueOrgH9PKpE7vOMQ8J +T4Y3I4p3n9jkfreQaXcLIODXxtNNKx7uTigHwbvgGGrLyN2fEzFGDZMwVa7T5lkViW7 QNr6GECFCBRdFXdbYdjPsOxowIdXBlzTaer4o= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.4.91 with HTTP; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 12:26:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <005901cae22a$e24d6ff0$a6e84fd0$@de> References: <4BD05788.3000000@gmail.com> <005901cae22a$e24d6ff0$a6e84fd0$@de> Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 23:26:13 +0400 Received: by 10.204.45.201 with SMTP id g9mr2708272bkf.89.1271964373993; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 12:26:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: Proposal about Version API "relaxation" From: Earwin Burrfoot To: dev@lucene.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > My main problem with devleoping new features on trunk first and then port= ing > by adding backwards cruft is, that you first don=E2=80=99t care with back= wards and > then suddenly have to think about it. This may change the API on trunk > again, to get nearer to backwards or maybe because a backwards layer is n= ot > possible. E.g. at the beginning of AttributeSource-TokenStream API, when > Michael and me discussed about the sophisticated=C2=AE backwards layer, w= e also > did some changes to the new TokenStream API, to support backwards better. I agree with Robert here. The whole damn point of unstable trunk is to allow developers to NOT think about backwards-compatibility, and think about best possible API instead. Backwards-compatibility is a sin, a necessary sin, but a sin nonetheless. Each time you have such impure thoughts, you should cleanse your soul by confessing at your local JUG. --=20 Kirill Zakharenko/=D0=9A=D0=B8=D1=80=D0=B8=D0=BB=D0=BB =D0=97=D0=B0=D1=85= =D0=B0=D1=80=D0=B5=D0=BD=D0=BA=D0=BE (earwin@gmail.com) Home / Mobile: +7 (495) 683-567-4 / +7 (903) 5-888-423 ICQ: 104465785 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org