On 10/11/2013 01:16 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
Commons SCXML has only one reverse dependency in Maven Central, flexistate, so I wouldn't bother with the binary compatibility and just keep the package as is.
Hmm. That might be the only reverse dependency of artifacts also deployed to Maven Central, but I'm pretty sure SCXML 0.9 is used in plenty of projects which might be impacted still.
I would expect stronger arguments to decide yes/no if a package rename is required or not. This would seem a bit (too) arbitrary to me.
Mind you, I'd prefer not having to do a package rename, but I got the impression there are more explicit 'rules' when to do so.
So I'd still would like to hear more explicitly if such a rule is defined, and if so how it is worded and where. But of course if there is none, fine by me :)
Thanks, Ate
http://mvnrepository.com/artifact/commons-scxml/commons-scxml/0.9 Emmanuel Bourg --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
