Le ven. 20 févr. 2026 à 15:22, Elliotte Rusty Harold <[email protected]> a écrit : > > Not sure if by "modules" you mean JPMS modules or Maven artifacts.
Both, I guess (not sure I understand the distinction which you tried to make). > Either way, keep in mind that commons geometry has already shipped 1.0 > so maintaining API compatibility is fairly important. Yes, and no. That is, we'll follow the usual (at "Commons") practice of maintaining BC, but if the actual contributors want to go on with a new API, it will be done towards a new major version. [In that case, the "top-level" Java package would become "o.a.c.geometry2", with a commensurate change of the Maven coordinates.] If Johann wants to experiment (e.g. to find out commonalities that could be merged into "Commons Geometry"), I'd even float the idea that we should readily do the "o.a.c.geometry2" change in a dedicated branch; for example, that would allow to easily compare (e.g. performance-wise) with the current API. [And if it turns out that a new major version is not required, we could relatively easily "back-port" into the "master" branch.] Best, Gilles >>> [...] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
