Re: 2.6 is not source compatible with 2.5

What is the use case for null as first parameter to a logger method? On Sun, May 29, 2016 at 6:53 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > We are going to need to update the release notes and/or site for 2.6 to > note that the 2.6 is not source compatible with previous releases. I tested > going from 2.5 to 2.

Re: 2.6 is not source compatible with 2.5

Great, TY. Gary On May 29, 2016 8:20 PM, "Ralph Goers" wrote: > I added the same information to the main site page. > > Ralph > > On May 29, 2016, at 2:08 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > On Sun, May 29, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Ralph Goers > wrote: > >> Here is the text that I propose to add to the announ

Re: 2.6 is not source compatible with 2.5

I added the same information to the main site page. Ralph > On May 29, 2016, at 2:08 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > On Sun, May 29, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Ralph Goers > wrote: > Here is the text that I propose to add to the announcement. I would also add > something

Re: 2.6 is not source compatible with 2.5

On Sun, May 29, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: > Here is the text that I propose to add to the announcement. I would also > add something similar to the web site. > > Note that subsequent to the release a minor source incompatibility was > found due to the addition of new methods to > the Lo

Re: 2.6 is not source compatible with 2.5

Here is the text that I propose to add to the announcement. I would also add something similar to the web site.Note that subsequent to the release a minor source incompatibility was found due to the addition of new methods tothe Logger interface. If you have code that does:logger.error(null, “This

Re: 2.6 is not source compatible with 2.5

Yet another reason to hate null! ;) On 29 May 2016 at 13:13, Ralph Goers wrote: > When you pass null as the first argument it doesn't know which is better > > Sent from my iPhone > > On May 29, 2016, at 11:07 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > Wait, how are error(Marker, String, Object) and error(Strin

Re: 2.6 is not source compatible with 2.5

When you pass null as the first argument it doesn't know which is better Sent from my iPhone > On May 29, 2016, at 11:07 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > Wait, how are error(Marker, String, Object) and error(String, Object, Object) > even confused by the compiler? > >> On 29 May 2016 at 13:02, Ralp

Re: 2.6 is not source compatible with 2.5

Wait, how are error(Marker, String, Object) and error(String, Object, Object) even confused by the compiler? On 29 May 2016 at 13:02, Ralph Goers wrote: > Only if the compatibility issue can be fixed. I don't think it can. We > will just update the site and announcement. > > Sent from my iPhone

Re: 2.6 is not source compatible with 2.5

Only if the compatibility issue can be fixed. I don't think it can. We will just update the site and announcement. Sent from my iPhone > On May 29, 2016, at 10:56 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > So what do we do, follow up with 2.6.1 right away? > >> On 29 May 2016 at 12:29, Ralph Goers wrote: >>

Re: 2.6 is not source compatible with 2.5

So what do we do, follow up with 2.6.1 right away? On 29 May 2016 at 12:29, Ralph Goers wrote: > Can’t do that. That would require a re-release. > > Speaking of which, the archives directory only lists a couple of releases. > I thought they were all supposed to be there. > > Ralph > > On May 29,

Re: 2.6 is not source compatible with 2.5

Can’t do that. That would require a re-release. Speaking of which, the archives directory only lists a couple of releases. I thought they were all supposed to be there. Ralph > On May 29, 2016, at 10:19 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > I think the RELEASE-NOTES.txt in the dist area needs to be upd

Re: 2.6 is not source compatible with 2.5

I think the RELEASE-NOTES.txt in the dist area needs to be updated as well. Gary On Sun, May 29, 2016 at 10:15 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: > I will add something to the announcement text when I send out the emails. > Those will go out in a few hours. > > Ralph > > On May 29, 2016, at 9:53 AM, Gary G

Re: 2.6 is not source compatible with 2.5

That would be good. I try to remember to add @since everywhere I can remember to, but an automated tool would help a lot. On 29 May 2016 at 12:02, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Sun, May 29, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Gary Gregory > wrote: > >> And to make it more difficult to see what's changed, we do not hav

Re: 2.6 is not source compatible with 2.5

I will add something to the announcement text when I send out the emails. Those will go out in a few hours. Ralph > On May 29, 2016, at 9:53 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > We are going to need to update the release notes and/or site for 2.6 to note > that the 2.6 is not source compatible with p

Re: 2.6 is not source compatible with 2.5

I suspect most people would have coded logger.error(message, t) though so hopefully it won’t be too bad. Ralph > On May 29, 2016, at 9:53 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > We are going to need to update the release notes and/or site for 2.6 to note > that the 2.6 is not source compatible with previ

Re: 2.6 is not source compatible with 2.5

Darn. I wish you had caught that before the vote. That is not good. Ralph > On May 29, 2016, at 10:02 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > On Sun, May 29, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Gary Gregory > wrote: > And to make it more difficult to see what's changed, we do not have @since

Re: 2.6 is not source compatible with 2.5

On Sun, May 29, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > And to make it more difficult to see what's changed, we do not have @since > 2.6 Javadoc markers for the new methods in Logger that expand arguments up > to 10 Objects :-( > I wonder which one of Clirr or Checkstyle could be extended to issu

Re: 2.6 is not source compatible with 2.5

And to make it more difficult to see what's changed, we do not have @since 2.6 Javadoc markers for the new methods in Logger that expand arguments up to 10 Objects :-( Gary On Sun, May 29, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > We are going to need to update the release notes and/or site for 2.