> -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Kovacs [mailto:pe...@apache.org] > Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2021 9:42 PM > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org > Subject: Re: API doc on web site [Was: Accessing the comment > object (annotation) in Draw/Impress via API]
> > The question of what "compatible" actually means is by no > means easy to answer. > > > > Example: Perhaps there is a property, method, etc. in the > API that accidentally has a spelling mistake in its name (I > recently had something like this in LO regarding a parameter > of a Posgresql access) - on the one hand, one can then argue > that a name correction that does not change the actual > function would be compatible, but one can also argue that it > is incompatible because only the old naming (which is > possibly already used a lot in projects) no longer works. > > I define Incompatible on User API level if the API user has to change > his work, as a result of changes in a release. OK, but what helps and your (or my) definition? We need a definition that everyone recognises, especially the PMC because they have the power to decide on releases. But I repeat myself: your statements about major, minor and micro releases, and that API changes should only be made in major releases, make sense and are recognised (I think by everyone). So why should we want to violate them? greetings, Jörg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
