On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 5:40 AM, Rob Tompkins <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Jul 27, 2017, at 12:53 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > We have not in the past forced a major version and Maven coordinate > change > > when updating the Java platform. We could do that of course. > > I’m a tad surprised by this. It feels like updating the minimum > accommodated java version would necessitate a major version change. > It does not. If we want to break Binary Compatibility (BC), then we update the major version, the package name (commons-lang -> commons-lang3), and the Maven Coordinates (commons-lang -> commons-lang3). At that point, if the group ID is not org.apache.commons, then we update that too. In the past, BC has always meant API BC, not byte code level compatibility (it's confusing that both acronyms are BC.) In some cases, we have broken source-level compatibility without a major version changes. Gary > > -Rob > > > > > Gary > > > > On Jul 27, 2017 06:47, "Jochen Wiedmann" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> Wouldn't that make it 5.0? (Binary incompatible change) > >> > >> Note: I am not opposing the change, I just propose an additional > >> change in the version number. > >> > >> Jochen > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 12:18 AM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >>> Hi All: > >>> > >>> I propose we make Java 7 the minimum for Commons Collection 4.2. > >>> > >>> Gary > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> The next time you hear: "Don't reinvent the wheel!" > >> > >> http://www.keystonedevelopment.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/ > >> evolution-of-the-wheel-300x85.jpg > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
