Yonik Seeley wrote:
I'm starting to feel like the lone holdout that thinks back compat for
commonly used interfaces and index formats is important.
I think the fact that your not the only one is why things got stymied.
I wouldnt personally support anything that didnt try and maintain
stability in commonly used interfaces,
and it appeared that consensus easily favored maintaining strong index
back compat.
The current policy has much stronger hooks than just common interfaces
and index formats though.
For really important things, we make exceptions anyway, and that will
probably still be the case.
The win we can probably get, I think, is a policy that makes things
easier where we pay a lot for a little. Its worth a lot of pain to
support common interfaces
and index formats. That doesnt cover all of the ground though.
We have already dealt with a lot of this by making special exceptions,
using abstract classes, and 'experimental APIs'.
Perhaps it makes sense to just bring our back compat policy up to date
with the reality of what has been happening anyway.
Or maybe nothing needs to be done after all. But I think we need to
address the out of the box performance in some manner.
--
- Mark
http://www.lucidimagination.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
