Sure, but surely we can provide aliases for those things internally so existing files continue to work? Maybe with a runtime warning to System.out so people know that they need to upgrade at some point.
It just seems a little harsh to dump that amount of work on people when we can reasonably easily provide a gradual upgrade path. -- Noel Greg Brown wrote: > Files with a .wtkx extension will still work fine. However, the "wtkx" > namespace prefix will change to "bxml", the annotation will change to @BXML, > and the serializer will change to BeanSerializer, so for consistency I think > we'd want to recommend changing the file extension as well. > Greg > > > On Jun 14, 2010, at 4:52 PM, Noel Grandin wrote: > > >> Hi >> >> I don't have a problem with the version numbering, but is there any >> reason why you can't continue to support the WTKX extension for >> backwards compatibility? >> >> -- Noel >> >> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 02:13, Greg Brown <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I'd really like to refactor WTKXSerializer to BeanSerializer and move it to >>> Pivot Core for the next release. However, I think this change is too >>> disruptive for the 1.x line. As a developer, I don't think I would be too >>> pleased to discover that I need to update all of my WTKX files to BXML when >>> migrating from Pivot 1.5 to Pivot 1.6. As a result, I'd like to suggest >>> that the next major version of Pivot be 2.0. >>> >>> We currently have Pivot 1.5.1 in the pipeline and can do additional point >>> releases for 1.5 as needed. We'll reshuffle the items currently assigned to >>> 1.6 and 2.0 into 2.0, 2.1, etc. as appropriate. Any objections? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Greg >>> >>> >>> >
