commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jörg Schaible <>
Subject Re: [bcel] Deprecated InstructionConstants
Date Thu, 02 Jun 2016 11:35:43 GMT

sebb wrote:

> Hang on please.
> There were plans to produce a new incompatible release with new Maven
> coords and new package names.
> However as I recall there was some pushback from users who wished to
> have a drop-in release.
> That is not possible unless the release is binary compatible.

The question is, why does one want to have a BC release? If Oliver uses it 
as drop-in replacement, he will not use any new stuff, i.e. he might be 
interested to get simply a version working with Java 8 runtime.

> So I spent quite a bit of effort reworking the changes so as to
> facilitate a binary compatible release.
> As far as I can recall, that effort was successful apart from changes
> to an interface (or two).
> There were some ideas as to how to resolve the interface
> incompatibilty, but no agreement was reached.
> I think the options were:
> - introduce new interface(s) extending the old one(s)
> - keep the interface(s) and handle any runtime errors
> - use the Java 8 (?) facility which allows an interface to contain a
> method implementation.
> Note that the code does not yet support some Java 8 features.

I'd really go on with bcel6 and new GAV using Java 8 as minimum and backport 
anything to 5.x that is required to let BCEL run on Java 8 runtime, but 
nothing else.

I am normally also in the BC camp, but I realize that we stress it sometimes 
too much and actually harm further development of a component. After several 
years of (public) inactivity of a component, we should really take the 
advantage for a cut.

The effort to release an additional 5.x after a major 6.0 is negligible 
compared to the constant annoyance by the limits of ancient JDKs working on 
the interesting stuff for a component.


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

View raw message