What is the argument for pushing out the qa_refactor based release? Do you believe that it is not ready to evaluate in production systems? Or do you believe that the rename is more important? If so, why? Just curious about people's perspectives here.
Bryan > On May 14, 2014, at 5:52 AM, Rafał Krupiński <rafal.krupin...@sorcersoft.com> > wrote: > > Dnia środa, 14 maja 2014 18:50:28 Peter Firmstone pisze: >> Perhaps we should postpone the rename for now. > > Actually, 3.0 is the only moment to change the names of classes, as it breaks > compatibility and strongly suggests new major version number. > > May I suggest another approach to the roadmap: > > Release +1 - modularized build, no code change - full binary compatibility. > > Release +2 - change the namespaces and class names, if any. Introduce > compatibility jars. > > Release +3 - merge/replace with the qa_refactor. > > Regards > Rafał
