Tim, that is excellent! Thank you. I have couple of minor questions:
Am I right with interpretation that the primary "source" is the spec rather than RI behavior? If the spec is consistent and logical, but contradicts to the RI behavior we are basing on spec? I'm asking just because that caused lots of debates last time and I want to make sure everyone agreed with this statement now. Another minor comment regarding to the serialization compatibility: What if serialization form is not specified and the spec states that serialization form will not be compatible with future releases? Does it mean we want to copy the existing serialization form? Or we are going to define our own? Should it be reflected in the guidelines? Wishes, -- Anton Avtamonov, Intel Middleware Products Division On 4/24/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > nice. thanks. > > Tim Ellison wrote: > > I've tried to capture in a webpage the compatibility guidelines that we > > have agreed over the last few weeks. > > > > The page is here: > > http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/subcomponents/classlibrary/compat.html > > > > I'm sure I'll have forgotten something, so additions / corrections / > > etc. are welcome. > > > > Regards, > > Tim > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
