On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 12:57 PM, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote: > We have to be willing to reevaluate the BC stringency we have had. Is it > working for our users? Is it worth the trouble it causes (people have left > this community over it)? Are there better options? Is it too strict and > could just be relaxed? > > Our BC policies sound good on paper and do address things like "jar hell" > very well, but we definitely are out on the fringe. We are the fanatics > when it comes to BC.
In the light of the current discussions, you may be right. However, what I still don't understand: Why is BC such an issue for people? I think, it is perfectly reasonable to do, what other projects do: - Maintain several release branches. - Depending on the branch, limit yourself to binary compatible changes, or not. - Whenever binary incompatibilities are desirable: Create a new branch, and start to publish releases out of that branch. So, what is the big deal? Jochen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
