Gilles Sadowski a écrit : > Hi. > >> Given that there *are* incompatibilities, I am +1 on the package renaming. >> >>> Should we change the top level package name from org.apache.commons.math to >>> org.apache.commons.math2 ? >>> > > I don't understand why version 2.0 should be assimilated to a new project.
It's not a new project in this case, but it is an (well, in fact many) incompatible change. > Is there someone who is going to work on the v1.2 code base? If not, what is > the gain? If someone raises a bug on 1.2 and can't switch to 2.0 because of the changes that may be too costly to handle, then we may well fix the bug in 1.2 and release another 1.x. Of course, we hope everybody will switch to 2.0 but we have to be pragmatic and be kind to users. > Anyone who has an application that runs under v1.2 can still use the > old JAR, which will be forever compatible. For a direct dependency and a completely controlled program, yes. The problem arises when multiple dependency level are involved. This occurs more frequently when a low level library is used, which is the case of [math]. If you use both directly [math] and use another library which uses [math] there is a problem when you update your top-level application but the intermediate library is not as quick as you and still rely on the previous version. The is the so-called jar-hell problem. Luc > As it has been said, upgrading to a new major release may involve > incompatible changes. > > Gilles > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
