On 7/20/2012 12:16 PM, Fabrizio Giudici wrote:
(Given that I'm spot on with Kevin about the reduction of the technical debt, but it's another story).
I think the question here is what's actual, substantive technical debt.
Having code that calls APIs which return Enumerations (as per one of Kevin's examples) isn't what I'd call technical debt, especially given that there are often no existing alternatives in core API classes. Having a new version of java.packageX come out that removed all these APIs and prevents one from upgrading to any future versions of the library until one refactors one's entire source base /and /moves to new library versions and/or changes/drops libraries to achieve the same with all the libraries one uses isn't a case of dealing with technical debt. It would be a case of insanity -- and a sign to switch platforms to something that doesn't treat its community in such an insane fashion (or never move to a new version of the platform, but that's insane in its own right).
-- Jess Holle -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
