gt;> From: sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2010 16:19
>> To: Commons Developers List
>> Subject: Re: [lang] v3.0 @since
>>
>> On 27/03/2010, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> > Since multiple @since tags are allowed and are treated like multi
> -Original Message-
> From: sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2010 16:19
> To: Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [lang] v3.0 @since
>
> On 27/03/2010, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > Since multiple @since tags are allowed and are tr
t; Senior Software Engineer
> Seagull Software
> email: ggreg...@seagullsoftware.com
> email: ggreg...@apache.org
> www.seagullsoftware.com
>
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Henri Yandell [mailto:flame...@gmail.com]
>
> > Sent: Saturday,
Henri Yandell [mailto:flame...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2010 14:49
> To: Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [lang] v3.0 @since
>
> I think so. If a recompile would make it work, then no need to update
> the @since. It would be lovely to say @improved 3.0; but a
gt;> From: Henri Yandell [mailto:flame...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2010 19:23
>> To: Commons Developers List
>> Subject: Re: [lang] v3.0 @since
>>
>> I think it does.
>>
>> The choice of a new package name was a workaround rather than a
andell [mailto:flame...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2010 19:23
> To: Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [lang] v3.0 @since
>
> I think it does.
>
> The choice of a new package name was a workaround rather than a
> declaration of a different package, so the @sinc
I think it does.
The choice of a new package name was a workaround rather than a
declaration of a different package, so the @since's still have value.
Hen
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:13 PM, Gary Gregory
wrote:
> Looking at trunk I see that the @since tags are still there. Since the
> package o.a.
