On 7/24/07, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/24/07, Dain Sundstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jul 24, 2007, at 7:56 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>
> > On 7/23/07, Dain Sundstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip/>
> >>
> >> So, should we drop SQLNestedException?
> >
> > This is tempting, but it breaks backward compatibility, so we should
> > probably deprecate in 1.3 and remove in the next major release. I
> > guess the deprecation warning / release notes should just tell people
> > to remove "legacy" casts in client code, since we never advertise this
> > exception.
>
> Sounds good. I marked the class as deprecated, moved DBCP-143 to
> 1.4, and added a note to the change log.
>
<snap/>
He means v2.0 AFAICT. Details [1].
-Rahul
[1] http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/releases/versioning.html
Yes that's what I meant, following our rules. In this case, that is a
little extreme, however, since the only breakage that I can think of
is old 1.3 code that includes explicit casts in catch blocks, or
direct usage or extension of the since-1.4-obsolete exception class
itself. Is this really worth waiting for 2.0? Am I missing something
here?
Phil
Phil
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
