Bruno Dumon wrote:

On Tue, 2003-06-03 at 23:12, Joerg Heinicke wrote:


I guess, legacy support won't be readded, so this is a WONTFIX?



yes, I agree. A bit of a problem though is that upon encountering the old namespace, the I18nTransformer nicely logs a warning, however the log level is error by default. Maybe we should lower it to warn instead?

(there are other components also logging deprecation warnings not
visible by default)


We should make a difference between deprecation (still works, but likely to disappear in the future), and detection of abandoned features.


So IMO, if the old i18n namespace is detected but not supported, then the message should be an error, since the feature is no longer provided.

But this leads to another question : why did we loose backwards compatibility ? I'm a bit ignorant about the evolutions that led to change the namespace, but why haven't we kept the old transformer beside a new one handling the new namespace ?

This would have allowed a smooth migration path by not breaking existing applications. Of course, the old transformer should log a deprecation warning encouraging users to migrate to the new one.

So what about renaming the new transformer to I18nTransformer2 and re-adding the old I18nTransformer ?

Sylvain

--
Sylvain Wallez                                  Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain           http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }




Reply via email to