IIRC that's something I've chatted about with Howard before and it's one of the things he plans to
do. There doesn't exist an issue though, so feel free to add it.
Uli
On 10.03.2010 20:30, Joachim Van der Auwera wrote:
Hi,
In 5.2 some interfaces have changed compared with 5.1, for example Link.
As methods have only been added, this should not be a problem for users
consumers, but it is a problem for code which implements the interface.
Would it not be an idea to put javadoc comments on all interfaces which
are not intended to be implemented by tapestry users (and possible ways
of creating instances or abstract base classes to implement) to clearly
indicate in which cases backwards compatibility can be assured?
Kind regards,
Joachim
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
