A technique I have used is to deprecate the classes with a clear 'WILL BE DELETED' message. Then delete them a couple of weeks later. Stephen
----- Original Message ----- From: "__matthewHawthorne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 6:30 PM Subject: Re: [io] some minor enhancements and completed action items > Maybe we can create the newly named classes, but leave the old ones and > deprecate them? > > This may be good for the short term, but we will have to think of a > strategy for removing them, since it wouldn't make sense to have a 1.0 > release with deprecated classes. > > > > > Jeremias Maerki wrote: > > >Yup, seen them. Will look at them on Thursday or Friday if nobody acts > >sooner. But the rename will likely provoke some Gump failures. Do we > >need to inform the dependant projects prior to the renaming or shall we > >just make it happen and let the others sort it out (IO is not released)? > > > >On 22.07.2003 18:07:34 __matthewHawthorne wrote: > > > > > >>I submitted patches for some small changes, everything is in bugzilla: > >> > >>http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21801 > >> > >> > > > > > >Jeremias Maerki > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
