Sure,
I can output a clirr report in text or xml, is there any predefined
templates to convert it to a more readable format (i.e. HTML)?
Rory
Stephen Colebourne wrote:
Perhaps you could run a clirr report, and publish the result? That way we can
all see what the amount of change in the API is.
And yes, this cold potentially be a problem with any non backwards-compatible
release. As I said before, I'm driving to find out how this release will sit
within the wider OSS and user community, and to try and avoid jar-hell.
Stephen
----- Original Message ----
From: Rory Winston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, 13 September, 2006 8:53:27 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release [net] version 2.0
Stephen
I'm afraid I dont really get waht you're asking? Surely this would be a
problem with any project that produces a non-backwards-compatible
release? As for the API, it is 99% backwards compatible - so far, there
are little changes to the public interface.
Stephen Colebourne wrote:
My question is whether 2.0 is backwards compatible with 1.0. If it
isn't, then how are we going to handle the situation where two
different OSS projects refer to two different versions of [net] -
jar-hell.
Stephen
Rory Winston wrote:
Steve
Sorry, I should have been more specific
1) Yes, there will be two separate branches of development. At the
moment, the trunk is the 1.x branch, whereas there is a separate
branch for JDK 5.0 dev. We can keep this the way it is, or swap the
trunk and branch at some stage.
2) We need two sites, for sure. I think an easy way would be to do
the separate Maven 1 (1.x codebase) and Maven 2.0 (2.x codebase)
builds, and just put a link from one site to the other in the Maven
menus. Otherwise, if Maven 2 can handle this kind of situation out of
the box, we should move the 1.x build over to Maven 2 as well.What do
you think?
Hope this helps
Rory
Steve Cohen wrote:
Rory Winston wrote:
OK, seeing as we have reached some kind of consensus on how to
handle backards-incompatible JDK releases, I'm restarting the vote
for a release of Commons::Net 2.0 (the JDK 5.0 branch).
As per usual, just respond with
+1
+0
-0
-1
Thanks
Rory
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sorry, Rory, but I think you need to express the consensus that you
think we are voting on. You haven't done that. "release of
Commons::Net 2.0 (the JDK 5.0 branch)" doesn't get to the heart of
all the issues.
1: Are there two "official" branches or is 1.4.x relegated to
"backward compatibility mode"? I would insist that there be two
branches until Sun puts 1.4.x into EndOfLife mode.
2. Is the site going to be organized to reflect the two branches?
If those two points are part of your "motion", I'm +1. Otherwise,
I'm -1.
Steve
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
