Leo Simons wrote: > <STRIP/> I stripped most of your mail, just because of size :) Now, I agree with most of what you said.
> > Hmm. Marker interface or not does not impact pojo-ness, does it? > *confused*. In any case, it should not be hard to generate some > adapters that don't have the "implements Component". > Ok, I think we are talking about two different things here and I must admit that my commits confused this as well. The first one is the "implements Component" in the interface which imho really should be avoided. The second issues is the "implements Component" in the implementation. I agree that we should leave it in the implementation for compatibility or move to the next major version. Moving to the next major version is imho not worth the effort. As you pointed out we would only remove *one* of several dependencies. >> What do others think about it? >> >> I can revert the stuff, if required, no problem. > > Well, let's see if we reach agreement, first :) > So, I think: removing "implements Component" from the interface, but leave it/add it to the implementation for compatiblity. Fine with everyone? Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler http://www.osoco.org/weblogs/rael/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
