Hi, I second JB on this, it's much better to get rid of old dependencies. And it's a Major Release version we're talking of. So -1 for extra "backward" compatible things.
regards, Achim 2013/3/12 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> > Hi Christian, > > for transition purpose, a simple solution would be to provide aliases to > the old commands (it's what I did at the beginning but we decided to remove > these aliases). > > I would prefer to update the README files from other projects with > something like: "For Karaf 2.x ..., For Karaf 3.x ..." more than > implementing a temporary solution directly in Karaf. > > Regards > JB > > > On 03/12/2013 10:03 AM, Christian Schneider wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> when testing my tutorial on karaf 3 I had the (expected) issue that the >> commands I described in the readme do not work on karaf 3. >> >> We discussed that it does not make sesne to fully support both command >> syntaxes as the many completion proposals will confuse people. >> Still it would be nice if the most important old commands still worked. >> >> So I wonder if it would be possible to have the old command syntax work >> in karaf 3 but not show it in completion and help. So people >> can still cut & paste the commands from a readme but else will only see >> the new commands. >> >> Another nice feature would be to let people run a command in the old >> syntax but replace it with the new syntax before executing. So people >> would be automatically introduced to the new syntax. The history would >> then show the commands as if they were entered in new syntax. >> >> Does that make sense? >> >> Christian >> >> > -- > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > [email protected] > http://blog.nanthrax.net > Talend - http://www.talend.com > -- Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer & Project Lead OPS4J Pax for Vaadin <http://team.ops4j.org/wiki/display/PAXVAADIN/Home> Commiter & Project Lead blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
