On 11 May 2011 14:36, Jochen Wiedmann <jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 2:28 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I'd be inclined to keep the current package name and Maven ids during >> (most of) incubation. > > Disagreed. Changing package names etc. should be the first steps in > incubation. As should be the publication of an early release with the > new package names. This allows end users to pick up as soon as > possible while still be upwards compatible.
However, if a breaking API change is needed, then the package name/Maven ids will *have* to be changed. > If you don't do that, then users might prefer to wait "until the major > change is done". Depending on incubator code is akin to depending on alpha code, i.e. the user should be prepared for API instability. If the user is not prepared to deal with that, then they should not be using incubator code in my view. But if the OGNL developers don't mind potentially ending up with something other than o.a.c.ognl that is up to them. I'm just trying to point out that there may be disadvantages to changing now. > > > -- > I Am What I Am And That's All What I Yam (Popeye) > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
