Kore Nordmann wrote:
On Thu, 2010-08-19 at 21:28 +0200, Derick Rethans wrote:
On Thu, 19 Aug 2010, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
My preference is to change it. Its basically a complete rebrand and
when ZC offers some kind of helper script for users to at least
announce the files which use the wrong prefix, everything should be
pretty ok. I also think it's the last chance to do such a change. When
the next release is out people will claim about backwards
compatiblity.
OK would like to hear you opinions on the prefix change.
I would like to change it too. We're Apache Zeta Components now. Besides
the rebrand, because this is a BC breaking change, we should also go
through the code and clean up the @apichange bits.
I still strongly oppose any BC breaks.
ezc is used a lot in different applications (I alone maintain 4 or 5) -
and it would be a hell lot of work to verify that those still work
properly.
BC is one of the key points for ezc / zeta - and breaking with this is
something I would really really dislike to see. A prefix does not mean
anything anyways, it is just a prefix…
+1
Imho all the fuss over class name prefix is unjustified: it is just a matter of style after all - it's the part of the name that comes after the prefix that is
actually important to get right.
While I can understand the desire for change of new developers, bc is much more important, unless we agree that current user base is non existent. It also has
long been one of the main selling points of the ezc (ie. "we are more stable than other frameworks"), so a deliberate break would entail a revision of the core
development principles.
bye
Gaetano
