On 19/02/2010, at 10:10 PM, Adrian Crum wrote: > --- On Fri, 2/19/10, Adam Heath <[email protected]> wrote: >> From: Adam Heath <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: Discussion: New package org.ofbiz.base.types >> To: [email protected] >> Date: Friday, February 19, 2010, 8:56 PM >> Adam Heath wrote: >>> Adrian Crum wrote: >>>> In the org.ofbiz.base.util package there are >> interfaces and classes that don't really belong there - they >> are data types, not utility classes. It would be nice if we >> could create a new package to contain basic data types: >> org.ofbiz.base.types. The new package would contain things >> like: Appender, DateRange, Factory, Range, ComparableRange, >> TimeDuration, etc. >>>> >>>> The org.ofbiz.base.util package could be >> (informally) limited to classes that follow the utility >> class pattern (only static methods, private constructor, >> etc). >>>> >>>> What do you think? >>> >>> org.ofbiz.base.lang >> >> Where ever they get moved to, you need to check for classes >> that >> existed in a previous release, and make certain they still >> exist, and >> just extend the classes that were copied to the new >> location. Then, >> add deprecation to the old versions. > > I probably wouldn't do that. I understand what you're getting at, but it adds > unnecessary code and complexity to the project. Anyone wanting to upgrade > from a release who used the affected classes could do a simple search and > replace on the import statements. > > Things like this have been moved around before.
I agree with Adam, in an ideal world, one would be able to uplift their hot-deploy components from 9.04 and drop them into 10.x without any issues. We're probably still a long way from that but I don't think we should make things any harder for the user than we need to. Regards Scott
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
