commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [ALL] About binary compatibility
Date Mon, 13 Jun 2016 19:08:14 GMT
Tomcat does this with a simple text file in the root of the
distribution. Compare Tomcat 9 [1] (currently in development) with
Tomcat 8 [2] (stable release).

We actually don't guarantee very much but Tomcat is a very different
type of project. The idea, however, could be re-used.

Mark

[1]
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/trunk/RELEASE-NOTES?view=annotate#l44

[2]
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/tc8.0.x/trunk/RELEASE-NOTES?view=annotate#l44

On 13/06/2016 19:57, James Carman wrote:
> I'd rather not make it (the OSGi metadata) the "source of truth".
> 
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 2:49 PM Thomas Vandahl <tv@apache.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 05.06.16 20:33, James Carman wrote:
>>> Not quite. OSGi is a special case. It's much more restrictive than simple
>>> J2SE, because it can be. In the general case, the public API for OSGi is
>>> different from the public API for J2SE. Let's not confuse the two.
>>
>> My intention was to use the OSGi meta data to define something that we
>> consider a public API. I agree to Sebastian that this might be difficult
>> for some components as they were not designed with a separation of
>> public and private API in mind. That's why I believe that suing
>> something a little more restrictive may help us to move forward and
>> improve the situation.
>>
>> Bye, Thomas.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>>
> 


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


Mime
View raw message