+1
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 1:31 AM, Alex Karasulu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't really have a specific view point on this topic. I would rather > have more efficient and easily maintained internals. I don't know if this > accomplishes that but I'm sure you guys can hash that out. > > Regards, > Alex > > On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 1:07 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> Mark Webb wrote: >> >>> I do not think this is a good idea. >>> >>> >> Looking at the three answers, it seems so ;) >> >> 3. We may confuse things for alot of people who may already be using >>> 2.0. Telling users that they will have to fix their code because of a >>> re-organization looks bad on our part IMHO. >>> >>> >> Regardless to the refactoring question, this is the kind of risk we have to >> consider, in any case. More than confusing the users who have based their >> code on the current 2.0 stack, I think it's much more important to build a >> coherent stack we will live with for a long time. Waiting for a 3.0 version >> and differing refactoring just because we have users of the current trunk is >> certainly not a good idea. Trunk is trunk, using it is a risk, and it's well >> know. >> >> Thanks ! >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> -- >> cordialement, regards, >> Emmanuel Lécharny >> www.iktek.com >> directory.apache.org >> >> >> >
