On Wed, 2010-09-08 at 18:05 +0200, Emmanuel Bernard wrote: > On 8 sept. 2010, at 10:35, Hardy Ferentschik wrote: > > > - So far I haven't renamed any package names. This has the advantage our > > existing users don't have to change their code. > > Does it make sense to rename the packages? > > That's the big question to me. Feedback welcome. I could go either way. > Pro: existing users don't have to change them > Con: > - we steal Solr's package which could conflict with people using Solr + > HSearch > - if we do a Solr integration one day (floating idea), we will have to do > something in the area
The general approach I like is to deprecate[1] the existing classes/interfaces and "gut them" into classes/interfaces in the new package, having the originals extend the newly packaged ones. ymmv [1] I prefer marking the stuff as @Deprecated as well adding log warnings, as appropriate, in their constructors to let users know. This lets users update/migrate at their "leisure" to an extent while still being able to try out your latest/greatest. -- Steve Ebersole <st...@hibernate.org> http://hibernate.org _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
