On 11 January 2012 11:42, Christian Grobmeier <grobme...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 9:06 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> The list is pretty concrete. >>> It does not say anything on binary compatibility (or i didn't find it). >> >> "Release B is said to be fully-compatible with Release A if B can >> simply replace A in (nearly) all circumstances and deployments without >> changing the client code or configuration, and without changing the >> semantics of any public or protected member. " > > And: > > "Generally speaking, a fully-compatible change will at most change the > private interface of a component, or simply add classes, methods and > attributes whose use is optional to both internal and external > interface clients." > > Have we defined internal/external interfaces for [email] or other > components? How are they defined? Are they excluded from the clirr > report? I think Henri brought that questions up already
The setter methods at least are clearly external. > Cheers > Christian > > -- > http://www.grobmeier.de > https://www.timeandbill.de > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
