I guess you could consider that you have to use 1.5 the break? But I think that goes without saying ...
Mark Miller wrote: > bq. While technically it breaks back compatibility, > > How does it break back compatibility? Generics are only compile time - > they simply don't exist in the binary. Java itself is extremely back > compat, so you can still use StringBuffer and the rest. I didn't find > anything in the archives or the wiki that talks about a back compat > break - that I can find anyway ... > > > Grant Ingersoll wrote: > >> Please read the archives on the 1.5 move. We have discussed it many >> times. There is also a Wiki page on it under the committers section. >> While technically it breaks back compatibility, we are going forward >> with it and we decided to allow generics, etc. right from the start. >> We also didn't feel like we had to convert everything in one fell >> swoop, either, as that will break many existing patches. >> >> >> On Aug 20, 2009, at 4:29 PM, Uwe Schindler wrote: >> >> >>> It would **not** break apps without generics, if the „upper” type is >>> the same (which is easily fulfilled by my example with the >>> AttributeSource). The whole 1.5 Java Collection API uses generics and >>> 1.4 programs still run. >>> >>> >>> ----- >>> Uwe Schindler >>> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen >>> http://www.thetaphi.de >>> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de <mailto:u...@thetaphi.de> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> *From:* Shai Erera [mailto:ser...@gmail.com] >>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 20, 2009 3:05 PM >>> *To:* java-dev@lucene.apache.org <mailto:java-dev@lucene.apache.org> >>> *Subject:* Re: Finishing Lucene 2.9 >>> >>> >>> What will be w/ generics? Won't they break cack-compat as soon as we >>> add them (e.g., if we move to accepting parameters as generics - it >>> may break an application which does not use generics yet). I think >>> that the move to 1.5 needs to include the generics as well, unless >>> we're willing to break back-compat later on. >>> >>> Shai >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:markrmil...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>> Michael McCandless wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 6:21 PM, Mark Miller<markrmil...@gmail.com >>>> >>> <mailto:markrmil...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>> I forgot about this oddity. Its so weird. Its like we are doing two >>>>> releases on top of each other - it just seems confusing. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I'm also not wed to the "fast turnaround" (remove deprecations, switch >>>> to generics) 3.0 release. >>>> >>>> We could, instead, take out time doing the 3.0 release, ie let it >>>> include new features too. >>>> >>>> I thought I had read a motivation for the 1.9 -> 2.0 fast turnaround, >>>> but I can't remember it nor find it now... >>>> >>>> Mike >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >>>> >>> <mailto:java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org> >>> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >>>> >>> <mailto:java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org> >>> >>>> >>> I thought the motivation was to provide a clean upgrade path with the >>> deprecations - you move to 2.9 and move from all the deprecated methods >>> - then you move to 3.0 and your good with no deprecations. I'd guess the >>> worry is that new features in 3.0 would add new deprecations and its not >>> quite so clean? >>> >>> Personally, I think thats fine though. New deprecations will come in 3.1 >>> anyway. You can still move everything in 2.9, and then move to 3.0 - so >>> what if something else is now deprecated? You can move again or wait for >>> 3.9 to move ... >>> >>> -- >>> - Mark >>> >>> http://www.lucidimagination.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >>> <mailto:java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >>> <mailto:java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org> >>> >>> >>> >> -------------------------- >> Grant Ingersoll >> http://www.lucidimagination.com/ >> >> Search the Lucene ecosystem (Lucene/Solr/Nutch/Mahout/Tika/Droids) >> using Solr/Lucene: >> http://www.lucidimagination.com/search >> >> > > > -- - 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
