Re: Re : svn commit: r766111 - /mina/trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/mina/filter/logging/LoggingFilter.java
Hi,
Agreeing with Edouard it's more like a bug fix, but if it's a problem
we can do the deprecation move.
Julien
Le Fri, 17 Apr 2009 19:26:12 + (GMT),
Edouard De Oliveira doe_wan...@yahoo.fr a écrit :
Shall we consider that this filter is part of the Core API ? We also
could consider that this is a necessary change as Mina website states
that 'All classes and methods follow camel notation strictly'.
No problem with rolling these changes back of course
but my +1 on keeping these
Cordialement, Regards,
-Edouard De Oliveira-
Blog: http://tedorgwp.free.fr
WebSite: http://tedorg.free.fr/en/main.php
- Message d'origine
De : Niklas Gustavsson nik...@protocol7.com
À : dev@mina.apache.org
Envoyé le : Vendredi, 17 Avril 2009, 21h04mn 33s
Objet : Re: svn commit: r766111
-
/mina/trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/mina/filter/logging/LoggingFilter.java
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 8:24 PM, edeolive...@apache.org wrote:
- public LogLevel getExceptionCaughtLoglevel() {
+ public LogLevel getExceptionCaughtLogLevel() {
This breaks the API, something we promised not to do after M4. Are we
still okay with this change?
/niklas
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: Re : svn commit: r766111 - /mina/trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/mina/filter/logging/LoggingFilter.java
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 9:00 AM, Julien Vermillard jvermill...@archean.fr wrote: Agreeing with Edouard it's more like a bug fix, but if it's a problem we can do the deprecation move. It certainly somewhat academic and I don't think there at lot of users of these methods. I would be fine with keeping the change if this breakage is clearly noted in the release notes. Note that those who override these methods might not even get a warning from their compiler that their code does no longer work. /niklas
Re: Re : svn commit: r766111 - /mina/trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/mina/filter/logging/LoggingFilter.java
I would favor Ashish proposal - ie, deprecating the old method, but keep the fix too. It's Sai proposal :-) Hey, are you back from your vacation??? - ashish
Re: Re : svn commit: r766111 - /mina/trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/mina/filter/logging/LoggingFilter.java
Well, interesting question. There is a typo for sure, but we have to
consider other aspects :
- this filter is used a lot of time
- it's not an important issue to keep the 'l' instead of a 'L'
In any case, the impact is very minimal, but Niklas is right, we are
supposed to have done a code freeze...
I would favor Ashish proposal - ie, deprecating the old method, but
keep the fix too.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 9:26 PM, Edouard De Oliveira
doe_wan...@yahoo.fr wrote:
Shall we consider that this filter is part of the Core API ? We also could
consider that this is a necessary change as Mina website states that 'All
classes and methods follow camel notation strictly'.
No problem with rolling these changes back of course
but my +1 on keeping these
Cordialement, Regards,
-Edouard De Oliveira-
Blog: http://tedorgwp.free.fr
WebSite: http://tedorg.free.fr/en/main.php
- Message d'origine
De : Niklas Gustavsson nik...@protocol7.com
À : dev@mina.apache.org
Envoyé le : Vendredi, 17 Avril 2009, 21h04mn 33s
Objet : Re: svn commit: r766111 -
/mina/trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/mina/filter/logging/LoggingFilter.java
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 8:24 PM, edeolive...@apache.org wrote:
- public LogLevel getExceptionCaughtLoglevel() {
+ public LogLevel getExceptionCaughtLogLevel() {
This breaks the API, something we promised not to do after M4. Are we
still okay with this change?
/niklas
--
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
