Right, this (you can jump to 2.9, fix all deprecations, then easily move to 3.0 and see no deprecations) is my understanding too, but I don't see what's particularly useful about that. It does produce a Lucene release that has zero deprecated APIs (assuming we remove all of them), but I don't think that's very important. Also, it's extra work having to do a "no-op, except for deprecations removal and generics addition" release :)
Vs say taking our time creating 3.0, letting it have real features, etc. Or, another option would be to simply release 3.0 next. After all, there are some seriously major changes in this release, compilation breakage, etc. ... things you'd more expect (of "traditional" software) in a .0 release. And, then state clearly that all deprecated APIs in 3.0 will be removed in 3.1. While this is technically a change to our back-compat policy, it's also just a number-shifting game since it would just be a rename (2.9 becomes 3.0; 3.0 becomes 3.1). Mike On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Mark Miller<markrmil...@gmail.com> wrote: > Michael McCandless wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 6:21 PM, Mark Miller<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 >> For additional commands, e-mail: 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 > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
