Re: River and Backward Compatibility

Brian Murphy wrote:

> One thing I might add though, would be that many of us don't
> speak up because we want to avoid getting drawn into one
> of those endless "discussions" that -- to some of us -- don't
> matter much, and often never come to any sort of conclusion
> ('tabs or spaces' seems to be like 'religion and politics' --
> something I never discuss).

Hi Brian,

The fact these things never come to a sort of a conclusion I consider a
problem (given the fact that we have a mixed codebase). The fact that
these things pop up IMHO not, if you think it is a meaningless
discussion simply ignore it. If the whole community thinks like this
these kind of discussions will die soon enough.

Bottom line I'm glad you gave your opinion with regard to compatibility,
it is much more convincing this way than a committer mentioning "there
are people out there who find backwards compatibility important", so
thanks for that.

But also (and better worded by Patrick Dowler than one might have
extracted from my response to Dan) it allows me to ask you what you
exactly mean with your "+1 for backward compatibility" as the original
question was "How much backward compatibility does everybody expect in
this first release?".

Should I read it as 100% compatible even with respect to the directory
layout of the distribution, only with regard to API, or something
completely different.
--
Mark

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Getting Started:     http://www.jini.org/wiki/Category:Getting_Started
Community Web Site:  http://jini.org
jini-users Archive:  http://archives.java.sun.com/archives/jini-users.html
Unsubscribing:       email "signoff JINI-USERS"  to [email protected]