On 11 Jan 2004, at 11:32, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
But this once again outlines the real need we have to clearly specify what we consider as publicly and officially supported APIs or private low-level contracts that are needed to implement the Cocoon core but that should not be safely relied upon since they may change if the Cocoon core changes.
Oh, I think there is the most complete agreement on this.
And again, I think the FOM discussion can be applied here as well: start closed and open up at need.
I'm all for applying a new design patter that says "making your public method final unless there is a clear need for not doing so". Normally, it's the opposite.
-- Stefano.
