On Aug 10, 2009, at 18:48, Michael Busch <busch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/10/09 2:05 PM, Michael McCandless wrote:
Or... and this is one crazy idea... maybe we should simply release
3.0
next, not removing any deprecated APIs until 3.1 or later. Ie,
"normal" software on having so many major changes would release an
X.0
release; I agree the "deprecation release" is unusual. This way
users
would realize/expect 3.0 to have major changes.
I'd be ok with that. It's not a crazy idea - at least less crazy as
the "deprecation release" idea itself! :)
We're getting in a situation where the "deprecation release"
approach is dictating and influencing how we add features to Lucene.
For me it's less important what version number a release gets - as
long as we can decide when and how to deprecate and remove an API
when we think it makes sense for the particular API - and not
globally for all APIs in Lucene because of a certain version number.
I've been arguing that for years, but we never seem to get over the
hump on it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
