Agree too in focusing in source code compatibility.
On 30 June 2014 18:27, Everett Toews <everett.to...@rackspace.com> wrote: > On Jun 27, 2014, at 8:29 PM, Chris Custine <chris.cust...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> 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). > > Agreed. I think we can reasonably tackle binary backwards compatibility on a > case by case basis. Hopefully it’s a relatively rare thing we have to > consider. If it’s coming up often, we should consider making some sort of > rule for it. > > Everett >
