Personally I think of this only in the context of source compatibility. This particular issue is kind of a rare case I think, but I think it would be ok to potentially return a value here where there was none before, especially since it was really borked prior to https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/403 (which is still open in case anyone has time to merge it).
Thanks, Chris P.S. I have been trying to send this email for 24 hours and it is always rejected by Apache mail servers, if several make it at once, I apologize! -- Chris Custine On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 4:02 AM, Andrew Phillips <aphill...@qrmedia.com> wrote: > An interesting question just arose in connection with a PR [1]: > > If we say that we want to avoid backwards-incompatible changes in minor > versions [2], do we mean *source* level or *binary* level compatibility? > > ap > > [1] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/419#issuecomment-47199784 > [2] https://wiki.apache.org/jclouds/DeprecationAndBetaPolicy
