I would go with the first option.

sebb <seb...@gmail.com> schrieb am Do., 2. Juni 2016 um 00:43:

> Hang on please.
>
> There were plans to produce a new incompatible release with new Maven
> coords and new package names.
> However as I recall there was some pushback from users who wished to
> have a drop-in release.
> That is not possible unless the release is binary compatible.
>
> So I spent quite a bit of effort reworking the changes so as to
> facilitate a binary compatible release.
> As far as I can recall, that effort was successful apart from changes
> to an interface (or two).
>
> There were some ideas as to how to resolve the interface
> incompatibilty, but no agreement was reached.
> I think the options were:
> - introduce new interface(s) extending the old one(s)
> - keep the interface(s) and handle any runtime errors
> - use the Java 8 (?) facility which allows an interface to contain a
> method implementation.
>
> Note that the code does not yet support some Java 8 features.
>
>
> On 1 June 2016 at 09:34, Jan Matèrne (jhm) <apa...@materne.de> wrote:
> >> It does not make sense though. All of the code in the bcel6 package is
> >> going to be released for the first time in the upcoming 6.0 release.
> >
> > Ok, didnt know that.
> > Then I'm fine :)
> >
> > Just wanted to give a hint.
> >
> >
> > Jan
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
>
>

Reply via email to