commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen Colebourne <>
Subject Re: [io] 2.0 Moving to minimum of JDK 1.5
Date Wed, 06 Feb 2008 10:50:15 GMT
From: Jochen Wiedmann <>
> I second this. IMO, binary compatibility is overemphasized in commons.
> In my practical experience I always found it to be sufficient that a
> change is detected by the compiler.

If your application uses a commons jar directly, then breaking binary compatibility would
be fine. You would just fix the compile errors as you say.

But this is not how commons jars are actually picked up. The vast majority of our users pickup
commons jars via another open source project.

If your application depends on two such OSS projects, and one updates to the later commons
jar, and one doesn't then what do you do? 

If you can provide an answer to that question (jar hell) without being absolutely strict on
binary compatibility, then let us know.

IMO, the solutions we are proposing here are the best we can come up with for Java of today.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message