I think we should clarify the page, then. My intent was not that a
major release *will* be incompatible. My intent was that a major
release *might* be incompatible, whereas minor releases can *not* be
incompatible.
David
Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
Kathey Marsden wrote:
Rick Hillegas wrote:
I think you may have already addressed the following issues in email,
but I don't see the results rolled onto the wiki page. Please pardon
my nitpicking. This kind of discussion turns me into a tiresome,
pedantic Mr. Hyde:
1) The cardinal rule. I recommend wordsmithing the cardinal rule: "The
goal is to allow any application written against the public interfaces
an older version of Derby can run, without any changes, against a
newer version of Derby." To me the following formulation reads better
"This is our goal: An application which ran against Derby yesterday
will run against a higher version of Derby tomorrow."
I prefer the original wording with only a small grammatical change to
instead of can.
"The goal is to allow any application written against the public
interfaces an older version of Derby to run, without any changes,
against a newer version of Derby."
It is good to think past tomorrow.
+1
The push towards allowing a major release to change things worries me.
It may be that we need to do this from time to time, but it should not
be the primary goal.
Dan.
