On 8 November 2010 07:32, Gary Gregory <ggreg...@seagullsoftware.com> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: jcar...@carmanconsulting.com [mailto:jcar...@carmanconsulting.com] On >> Behalf Of James Carman >> Sent: Sunday, November 07, 2010 18:14 >> To: Commons Developers List >> Subject: Re: Backwards incompatible changes and package names (was: Re: >> [VOTE] >> Release Commons VFS 2.0) >> >> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 9:02 PM, Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > I would not -1 the release, but I would encourage the RM to consider making >> > it 1.x if there are no compat breaks. >> > >> >> So, how about now that we know there are compat breaks? I would -1 >> the release now that we know the API is in fact "broken" between 1 and >> 2 and they're not doing the package/artifactId change (barring any >> justification why we think it's okay). > > Well, that should settle it. API-breakage -> new major version -> > package/artifactId change. > > So we can take this RC, do the above changes, then keep move on to a Java 5 > themed release for 2.1.
I think we ought to remove the deprecations as well, otherwise they cannot be removed until 3.0, which I assume will require yet another package/artid change. > > Gary > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
