Hi Thorsten/Mathias, > Yeah. But turning this around, this is how we currently handle > existing API: banning completely unproblematic changes to supposedly > very infrequently used API, in the hope that this will keep extensions > runnable.
Exactly. Some very early interfaces (i.e. XPropertyBag and css.util.logging) are more or less flawed, have never been implemented in OOo, and nonetheless could not be fixed just for some "generic compatibility" issue which does not apply to them. Quite painful. Other less basic cases (my beloved services which effectively describe implementations, where I am not even allowed to *add* properties or interfaces) are even more numerous. >> Let's make incompatibilites explicit, no matter if they are caused >> by API or behavioral changes. And allow extensions to deal with that >> but don't force them to become incompatible "just because". Hey, did somebody say "versioning of interfaces" here? :) Ciao Frank -- - Frank Schönheit, Software Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - Sun Microsystems http://www.sun.com/staroffice - - OpenOffice.org Base http://dba.openoffice.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
