On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 10:37 AM, peter royal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Jun 11, 2008, at 10:26 AM, Brian McCallister wrote:
>
>> Frequent (one a year is very very frequent) backwards incompatible API
>> changes lead to no users. If ya'll take this roadmap I, for one, will go
>> find some library which isn't going to dead end me in the *foreseeable*
>> future.
>>
>
> agreed 100%
>
> i still have some code on MINA v1 due to the vast number of changes that
> have happened to the API with v2
>
> based on what Emmanuel laid out, the only backwards incompatible change is
> a new ByteBuffer implementation. I don't believe NIO.2 should involve any
> radical API changes for users, as it would just optimize MINA internals.
>
> with that said, would you prefer a continuing of changes now for v2 to
> provide a stable API looking far in the future (the ByteBuffer changes) ?
>
> the struggle i have is at what point do we say "the v2 API is sealed, lets
> release it", vs "there's a ton of changes in v2 already, lets get the rest
> of the incompatible ones we see done so we don't have to do it again"
>
> thoughts?


Get the 2.0 API to the one you want to use for the next five years and then
use it for the next five years.

-Brian


>
>
> -pete
>
> --
> (peter.royal|osi)@pobox.com - http://fotap.org/~osi<http://fotap.org/%7Eosi>
>
>

Reply via email to