commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [BCEL] 5.3 is going to be messy
Date Wed, 08 Jun 2016 09:32:11 GMT
On 8 June 2016 at 00:56, Torsten Curdt <tcurdt@vafer.org> wrote:
>>
>> >> 1) I don't believe we should force users to migrate their code in
>> >> order to support java 7/8.
>> >>
>> >
>> > ...and that line of thinking is why it feels like commons projects are
>> > effectively stuck in the past.
>>
>> And maybe the ease of upgrade is why they are popular with users.
>>
>
> Well, let's call that a theory.
>
>
>
>> > No one needs to upgrade. If your projects live in the past - there are
>> bug
>> > fix releases.
>>
>> That's not the case in general. Very few commons projects maintain
>> parallel releases.
>>
>
> Not something we couldn't change - but I was thinking larger scale.
> It's a common pattern elsewhere.
>
>
>> But if you want the new shiny then you as well should be OK to put in some
>> > effort to do so.
>>
>> Why should the user have to do so?
>>
>
> Because it's not everyone's vision is to work so others don't even have to
> lift a finger to gain the benefits.
> We are volunteers! Idealism aside: I think there is a line - maybe people
> draw them differently.
> Especially if we want to attract or welcome new developers we need to find
> a balance.
>
> As user or dev: You want the new shiny, you don't have to pay for it - the
> least you can do is to make some minor code adjustments. I'd call it
> a courtesy. And that's how it works for many other open source projects,
> too.
> Right now I don't see commons "stability" as a blessing - rather a curse.
>
> Release early, release often.
> If your API doesn't change with every release - people will probably
> forgive you ...and love you for supporting the latest and greatest.
>
>
>> Change should be easy - not just for our user but also for us.
>>
>> There are many more users than there are developers.
>>
>
> So? What's your point there?
>

Commons libraries are generally very low level, and are often embedded
deep within software stacks.

So changes which require downstream changes are expensive when
considered as a whole.

This is very different from many other ASF projects which can
generally be updated independently because there are no dependencies
on them.

My view is that we must not ignore the effect of Commons changes on
the entire ecosystem.

>> My 2 cents
>>
>> Suppose there are 10 developers on BCEL; that's 20 cents.
>>
>> There may be 1000 or more users.
>>
>> That's 20 dollars.
>>
>
> 20 dollars no one of us will ever see. Have those 1000 user spend a dollar
> or two and maybe it will cover the cost of just this thread. I don't think
> that calculation will get us very far.
>
> cheers,
> Torsten

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message