On 25 May 2017 at 17:23, Oliver Heger <oliver.he...@oliver-heger.de> wrote: > I also think that a new major release just to fix this problem would be > overkill and cause clients even more trouble. > > Would the following approach work as a compromise: > > - [lang] declares an optional dependency to the desktop module. > - All affected classes (AbstractCircuitBreaker and its two sub classes) > are marked as deprecated. > - Copies are created from the original classes with slightly changed > names or in a new package (tbd). These copies use a new change listener > mechanism. > > IIUC, the resulting [lang] module can now be used without the dependency > to desktop when the new classes are used. The dependency will only be > needed for the deprecated versions.
This seems like a reasonable compromise approach to me. Especially as I haven't heard anything else that would drive the need for a v4.0. Stephen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
