On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 9:12 PM, Grant Ingersoll<gsing...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Or... and this is one crazy idea... maybe we should simply release 3.0 >>> next, not removing any deprecated APIs until 3.1 or later. Ie, >>> "normal" software on having so many major changes would release an X.0 >>> release; I agree the "deprecation release" is unusual. This way users >>> would realize/expect 3.0 to have major changes. >> >> I'd be ok with that. It's not a crazy idea - at least less crazy as the >> "deprecation release" idea itself! :) >> We're getting in a situation where the "deprecation release" approach is >> dictating and influencing how we add features to Lucene. For me it's less >> important what version number a release gets - as long as we can decide when >> and how to deprecate and remove an API when we think it makes sense for the >> particular API - and not globally for all APIs in Lucene because of a >> certain version number. > > I've been arguing that for years, but we never seem to get over the hump on > it. Well, we probably shouldn't insert another hump in our path for releasing (there are plenty of those already!), so maybe we just stick w/ the current plan (2.9 -> 3.0)... Mike --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
