Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: > "이희승 (Trustin Lee) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" wrote: >> So.. The changes I am proposing is all about simplification sacrificing >> backward compatibility. This might affect people who are using MINA 2 >> M1 or trunk. We had to think about all these issues before recommending >> people to use 2 M1 and placing the download links in the very top of the >> download page. (we could move the links to the unstable releases >> section.) >> > The problem is that we already have people who are using MINA 2. Now, > the question is : should we release it and go for a MINA 3 with a > completely new API, or should we change MINA 2 API now before we release > it as a RC... > > That's not a simple question. > > My personnal choice would be to do it now, before MINA is widely used. > We never said that MINA 2 API was stable. As soon as we deliver the > first RC, we are done. > > Another option (and may be better) would be to deprecate dead API (but > that means we still have to guarantee some compatibility... No fun at > all !)
I concur with you. I'd prefer to make the changes in M2. -- Trustin Lee - Principal Software Engineer, JBoss, Red Hat -- what we call human nature is actually human habit -- http://gleamynode.net/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
