Costin Manolache wrote:
And if the TCK signature tests pass - that's a bug in the tests :-).
We shouldn't touch the method signatures in servlet API.
Having read everyone's comments and having thought some more about this
during today, my current plan is:
- fix any non-generics warnings in the spec code
- commit the fixes
- fix the generics warnings but don't commit - I can make a patch available
on p.o.a if anyone is interested
- fix the warnings in the rest of the code base.
Mark
Costin
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 2:03 AM, Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 2008-05-06 at 08:27 +0100, Mark Thomas wrote:
I am leaning towards 4 on the basis that
a) This is trunk, not a release branch
b) This option generates no warnings
c) I assume the spec will start using generics at some point (maybe in
3.0?)
If modifying the spec interfaces seems like a step too far then 3 would
be
my next choice.
There are signature tests in the TCK :( I don't think that will pass.
Rémy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
