On 7 June 2016 at 17:18, Andrey Loskutov <losku...@gmx.de> wrote: > On Tuesday 07 June 2016 17:15 sebb wrote: >> There have been quite a lot of changes to BCEL since 5.2. >> >> Lots of places currently mention 6.0 (@since; JIRA; probably elsewhere). >> >> So whilst 5.3 might be OK as the next release version, it's going to >> be a lot of work to change all the references. >> >> I therefore propose we should use 6.0 for the backwards compatible >> release using the original Java package names and Maven coordinates. >> >> A subsequent incompatible release can always use 7.0. > > +1 for 6.0. > Even if BCEL trunk code after some backwards compatible changes will don't > break the BC, it most likely will break the behavior.
Hopefully not, otherwise it negates most of the reasons for providing a compatible release. It may be acceptable to break behaviour in such a way that only a few unusual use cases are broken, but if every downstream user has to recode their app then there's no point in striving for BC. AIUI the whole point of the exercise is to provide a drop-in release. > -- > Kind regards, > google.com/+AndreyLoskutov --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
