Good idea. Another user commented something similar in the pull request, and I
believe Rob's suggestion was in the same direction.
Here's a PR that fixes clirr and deprecates a few things for 2.0:
https://github.com/apache/commons-text/pull/102
Thanks!
Bruno
On Wednesday, 20 February 2019, 11:42:35 pm NZDT, Benedikt Ritter
<brit...@apache.org> wrote:
Am Mi., 20. Feb. 2019 um 08:58 Uhr schrieb Bruno P. Kinoshita <
ki...@apache.org>:
> Hi all,
> Just finished merging a pull request to TEXT-104, where the JaroWinkler
> distance was updated. The class was actually computing a text similarity
> score, not an edit distance. The user that contributed did a great job
> moving the logic into a separate class, then updating the method to return
> a distance instead.
> Later I realized this would break both behaviour and binary compatibility.
> So just wondering what others think. Is it time to gather a few more
> issues in text, maybe even consider updating libraries/java/etc, drop
> @Deprecated stuff, and prepare a 2.0? Or is it too soon, and instead revert
> moving the code to a branch, and update TEXT-104 with a note about the
> branch?
>
This would be a bad signal to the contributor. Do you think it's possible
to have both solutions side by side? So we keep the old class with the name
an interface, deprecate it and put the new solution in the same package
with a different class name?
Benedikt
> CheersBruno
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
