> * Major release > - I don't think so. For JPA2, it's convenient to do so. But I don't > think that that will always be the case.
Agree. >> - application, with no source change, re-compiles in (n+1)th release can >> execute in (n)th release. > Just to clarify, you mean "application that executed in (n)th release > can re-compile in (n+1)th release", right? What I am trying to state is if the source in (n)th release compile and run and it has not changed, i.e. not using any new functions in (n+1), I should be able to recompile under the (n+1)th environment and take it back to the (n)th and run successfully. So it is binary backward compatible only if no new functions is used. Albert Lee. On Feb 4, 2008 1:45 PM, Patrick Linskey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > * Major release - Should the major release parallels to the JPA spec > > numbering? > > I don't think so. For JPA2, it's convenient to do so. But I don't > think that that will always be the case. > > > - application, with no source change, re-compiles in (n+1)th release > can > > execute in (n)th release. > > Just to clarify, you mean "application that executed in (n)th release > can re-compile in (n+1)th release", right? > > -Patrick > > On Feb 2, 2008 8:22 PM, Albert Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > * Major release - Should the major release parallels to the JPA spec > > numbering? > > > > * Backward compatibility - I just want clarifications on the following > > scenario: > > - application compiled in (n)th release can execute in (n+1)th release > > without re-compilation. > > - application, with no source change, re-compiles in (n+1)th release > can > > execute in (n)th release. > > - application, with source change that use new functions, re-compiles > in > > (n+1)th release can only be executed in (n+1)th release. > > > > Thanks, > > Albert Lee. > > > > > > On Feb 2, 2008 5:40 PM, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I'd like to formalize our release policy. Please take a look at > > > http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=55076 > > > and comment. > > > > > > I'd like to remove the *DRAFT* status of the policy next week. > > > > > > Craig > > > > > > Craig Russell > > > Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo > > > 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Albert Lee. > > > > > > -- > Patrick Linskey > 202 669 5907 > -- Albert Lee.
