On 10/26/06, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've mulled it for a bit, and I don't think that it's worth it for us
to try and change package names to make it easier for people not to be
held up by other entities. If we do that then there will be less
pressure for those projects to upgrade, and we'll just be causing lots
of pain for the many to save pain for a much smaller group. Admittedly
the many get their pain at compile time while the smaller group
wouldn't have found their pain until runtime if they don't have good
build practices.

I can support either way but if I'm going to support breaking
backwards compatibility I think we should release minor releases of
all components that are broken by this change, even if they aren't the
latest major release.

My personal preference is to let a few people who care about
refactoring collections perform some major surgery into a new package
name and produce something leaner, meaner and hopefully easier and
more robust to use.

--
Sandy McArthur

"He who dares not offend cannot be honest."
- Thomas Paine

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

Reply via email to