On 19/05/2009, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 6:53 AM, <luc.maison...@free.fr> wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Considering the ongoing discussion in another thread, the current changes > that have been done on [math] for the last months belong to the major changes > with large incompatibilities with previous versions.
Are you sure that there are large incompatibilities? I thought you were trying to preserve API compatibility? > We have already decided that the version number will be 2.0 to acknowledge > that. I know of at least one big international research project that uses > commons-math 1.2 and will switch to 2.0 when it will be published. They have > already faced compatibility problems recently (two days ago). > > > > Should we change the top level package name from org.apache.commons.math > to org.apache.commons.math2 ? > > > I'd say yes. > In that case, it should be OK to break compatibility in the Frequency class by requiring that parameters be Comparable rather than Object - see MATH-259 & MATH-261 - which will improve compile-time safety. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
