Daniel John Debrunner wrote: > >I much prefer the approach in the wiki page, strive for compatibility. >If such a requirement comes up for a specific release, then we can >document that sharing jars between 12.x and 13.x is not supported. > > > Sounds ok to me as long as such an incompatibility is documented and in the absence of such documentation is treated as a bug. I'd just like the user impact to be clear in the documentation and not have a situation where mixing jars breaks and we say "Hey we really do strive for compatibility as much as possible, but we never guaranteed it would work."
Don't the internal interface deprecation guidelines mean that mixed jars will stop working together at some point? BTW, if this thing gets submitted to vote again. I'd like to suggest we get consensus on the wording before it does. I'd much prefer David just submit the code to share messages with some really clear way to version the messages into the future that doesn't break anything and then you'd get no trouble from me. Kathey
