On 9/27/01 8:11 AM, "Sam Ruby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Jason van Zyl wrote:
>> 
>> I see the note mentioning that turbine2 and turbine3 cannot exist on the
>> same classpath: would a recommended approach be to adjust the package names
>> in turbine3 to something like org.apache.turbinex. The decouple torque and
>> fulcrum code doesn't cause a problem but the core code left in turbine3
>> definitely collides.
>> 
>> While we're in alpha so the change won't hurt now if that is a strategy that
>> would be helpful.
> 
> I guess that would be one path.  One that makes it marginally harder for
> people to upgrade from Turbine 2 to Turbine 3.
> 
> Another would be to actually provide a smooth upgrade path from Turbine 2
> to Turbine 3.

That's always been the plan. The adapter code might work easier if the
package names were different.

I fully intend for there to be an upgrade path, but I'm not worried about it
at the moment. When the API for 3.x is finalize than I'll look at it, the
changes are so vast I don't see much point in trying to make them work
together on a daily basis.
 
> - Sam Ruby
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-- 

jvz.

Jason van Zyl

http://tambora.zenplex.org
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine
http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity
http://jakarta.apache.org/alexandria
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to