Le 23/05/2017 à 00:52, Stephen Colebourne a écrit : > One final option is to declare an optional dependency on java.desktop, > such that the AbstractCircuitBreaker will fail to load unless the > end-user manually chooses to add java.desktop. I don't like it, but it > may be a compromise for compatibility.
Would it be possible to: 1. deprecate add/removeChangeListener, keep only empty methods 2. remove the underlying PropertyChangeSupport 3. not declare a dependency on java.desktop, even optional In this situation will Java 9 be able to load and use AbstractCircuitBreaker as long as the add/removeChangeListener methods are never used? Or will the runtime check the method signatures when loading the class? Emmanuel Bourg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
