Rick Hillegas wrote: > I'm afraid I was too elliptical in my first attempt to describe this > problem. Here's my next attempt: > [snip] > > The point I am trying to make is this: It seemed to me that code cloning > was put forward as an alternative to the compatiblity checking in > David's first proposal. I don't think cloning solves this problem. It > merely pushes the problem around a bit. We still need run-time > compatibility checking.
I think you are descibing a different problem, communication between the client and the server. In that case yes, version compatibility checking is needed. But what David is describing with the common code in separate packages does not need versioning, as the code is self contained within its domain of engine, client or network server. You are describing the case where the common code from one domain creates something that's consumed by common code in another domain (java object in serialized form, drda protocol etc.). That style would need versioning even if we didn't have common code. Dan.
