> -----Original Message----- > From: Ralph Goers [mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com] > Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 06:35 > To: Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [VFS] Analysis of binary compatibility breaks between 1.0 and > 2.0; release strategy > > > On Nov 17, 2010, at 2:54 AM, sebb wrote: > > > On 17 November 2010 07:17, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > >> > > > >> I'm not suggesting we change these. Since we are adopting Java 5 I would > prefer to change these now and move forward. > > > > To change or not to change? Sorry, cannot understand the last paragraph. > > > > Sorry I wasn't clear. > > My feeling is that if we are upgrading to Java 5 then we should do it > correctly. Go ahead and break compatibility where required. In that view the > changes done to the Comparables were done correctly. I suspect they will > cause very few problems in any case. Since we have changed the package name > and artifactId I just wouldn't worry about it. > > I agree we should remove the deprecated APIs - there don't appear to be many > of them - although I do find myself wondering why in AbstractFileObject > doSetLastModifiedTime was deprecated in favor of doSetLastModTime. I actually > prefer the former name.
+1 > > Ralph --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
