Vadim Gritsenko wrote: > Berin, > > What I think about it... Isn't it too late to actually add and deprecate > removed/renamed methods/variables? The release is out of the door - and > does not have all this... To users of released version, this looks like > adding new deprecated methods. What's your opinion?
My spin is that these should have been caught earlier, and the only way practice is established is by example. > > Vadim > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Berin Loritsch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 1:31 PM >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Subject: Re: [WARNING] Version migrations are a headache! >> >>Berin Loritsch wrote: >> >>Does ANYONE remember what the value was for: >> >>Constants.SESSION_STATE_ATTRIBUTE? >> >>Or what it was replaced with? >> >> >>>The problem comes with changing dependencies and classnames. For >>>example the >>>SessionStateSelectorFactory has been renamed the >>> > SessionAttributeSelector. > >>>While the second is arguably a better name, please use deprecation >>> > so that > >>>users can be warned before the class is eliminated! >>> >>>Avalon Excalibur has a few classes which follow the following >>> > approach: > >>>/** >>> * @deprecated Use ExcaliburComponentManager instead! >>> */ >>>class DefaultComponentManager extends ExcaliburComponentManager{} >>> >>>This way the functionality is the same, but the user is pointed to >>> > the > >>>correct version gracefully. >>> >>>It is a number of issues like this, the constant rearranging of the >>> > core > >>>components, etc. that make moving between Cocoon versions a >>> > headache. > >>>I honestly think we have a few too many different types of core >>> > components, > >>>and it would be better if they were rearranged a bit. >>> >>>This is especially true since people have portions of the >>> > cocoon.xconf > >>>file that are specialized to their site! >>> >>>DANGER, WILL ROBINSON! >>>*Any* time you add a new abstract method to an abstract class, or >>> > change > >>>an abstract method on an abstract class--that change is NOT >>> > BACKWARDS > >>>COMPATIBLE! >>> >>>I have some specialized actions that extend >>>AbstractComplimentaryConfigurableAction >>>that are now broken because of this very thing. Now I have to >>> > figure out > >>>what changed! >>> >>> >> >> >>-- >> >>"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary >> > safety > >> deserve neither liberty nor safety." >> - Benjamin Franklin >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > . > > -- "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
