hello. I never said to redesign APIs. I only said that we can move math algorithms from non-math projects, to the math projects
On Mon, 17 Jul 2023 at 11:50, Elliotte Rusty Harold <elh...@ibiblio.org> wrote: > There are a lot of proposals floating recently to churn the API. I'm > going to move a direct no on all of this. > > Mild improvements in consistency in no way justify any API breakage or > even deprecation. Every method and class that currently exists in any > commons library should continue to exist there with the same signature > indefinitely. Compatibility is far more important than consistency. Do > NOT redesign or rethink the APIs at this late date. Too much depends > on them. > > New methods, classes, and packages, and projects can be added where > appropriate. Internals can be improved as possible. But what's there > today stays there, absent the very rare case where critical bugs or > security issues require breaking an API. However, that's extremely > uncommon. > > No API will ever be perfect or free from hindsight. But the cost of > change is too high to justify breaking commons libraries. Stare > decisis is as valuable a principle in API design as in law. > > -- > Elliotte Rusty Harold > elh...@ibiblio.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >
