+1
On Sat, 30 Oct 2004, Jeremy Boynes wrote: > Recently the API for constructing GBeanInfo changed when the builder > class was renamed from GBeanInfoFactory to GBeanInfoBuilder. I agree > with the intent here but I would ask that in the future when we make > such a large change we give more heads up to the community. > > My concern here is that this class is fundamental enough that it is used > in every GBean. Yes, the change fixed this for the project, but it will > have been disruptive to any users out there who may have written their > own GBeans. We broke their code for what is essentially a cosmetic > change (a more fitting name for the class). > > We cannot afford to gain the reputation that some projects' have: of > changing APIs willy-nilly. People will end up writing code against > Geronimo specific APIs and they need to have the confidence that there > will be stability from one release to the next. > > We are close enough to a final release now that we need to start > considering this kind of impact during day-to-day development and use > professional judgment on whether a change *should* be made and if so how. > > For example, I believe this was a good change to make as it clarifies > the purpose of that class. Given this is a fundamental API, it is of > benefit to users to have this right in V1.0 so that we do not have a > legacy issue forever. However, this is not a blocking issue and it is > not critical enough that it needed to be made immediately and without > notice. > > Instead, I would have preferred if someone could have proposed this on > the mailing list first and given users reasonable notice before actually > making the change. > > I realize that there could have been discussions of this privately or > perhaps on IRC, but such discussions need to be mailed to the dev list > so that the community as a whole gets involved. > > -- > Jeremy >
