On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 12:44:13PM -0800, Ienup Sung wrote: > We've been delivering ICU 2.1 and 3.2 for several minor releases now. > Clearly way more than a life time of a minor release. > > We don't EOF off things that easily unless that is absolutely necessary.
So you won't remove ICU 2.1 and 3.2 from the system? > In fact, I anticipate that we will have to deliver more in the future. > Since, as an example, if a SWI team uses ICU 4.0 and another SWI team wants > to > use say, ICU 5.0 which has a new feature, then we will definitely want to > deliver and maintain the both. OK, that's one part of what I was asking for (multiple versions if needed). > Also don't get the Volatile as a message that we want to and will > switch ICU 4.0.1 with ICU 5.0 within a life time of minor release or > anything like that. > > Volatile means that when we have ICU 4.0.2, i.e., ICU 4.0.1 patched, say, > at S11U2, customers be aware that you *might* see changes in interfaces > however unlikely that will be and that is the key message. You've shown that some incompatible changes were made at minor releases, but what about patch? Do you have any examples of incompatible changes made in patch releases? The ICU user guide clearly claims that the ICU community intends not to break anything on patch (except for C++).
