Hello,
as a potential user, I'd suggest you go with an alpha. It would convey
the message that there will probably be some more API change, albeit
not many. To me beta suggest that the API is set and only bugs that
won't change the API will be fixed.
Anyway, looking forward to start using it, wha
Alternatively you might consider moving all components to the new
groupId "org.apache.commons" and using maven's relocation
(http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-relocation.html) to ensure
backward compatibility.
SaM
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 8:58 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 15/06/2009, Jörg Schaible
Hi,
I have not been in the conversations before, but I am also a proponent
of using interfaces. One way to enable extensions for those interfaces
would be to use the capability pattern (similar to what is described
here: http://java.dzone.com/news/the-capability-pattern-future- ).
There could be
tself provide any
> implementation, vfs depends on various libraries for this and wrap them with
> the same api.
>
> Ciao,
> Mario
>
>
> ---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAI
uld probably not
consider "compress" at all?
What do you guys see being the big difference between the 2 approaches
and is that a good enough reason to keep both libraries?
Thanks,
Samuel Le Berrigaud
-
To unsubscribe, e-mai
