Re: [cdi-dev] Binary compatibility and removing classes

On 19 Sep 2014, at 02:31, John D. Ament <john.d.ament(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > Hi all > > Was reading through the log from this past meeting. To comment on a couple of points: > > - In JMS 2.0 we really wanted to remove the old Queue and Topic based interfaces. We received a lot of push back from even deprecating them, and the most that could be done was to add a comment to the javadoc dissuading people from using them and only keeping them around for legacy purposes. Similar to how @New is stuck around, probably forever, any existing classes need to stick around forever. When it comes to pruning, the pruning is around a technology and not just a small set of classes within a JSR. Agreed, this is correct, and Antoine and I are aware of this and will make sure this is what happens. > > - In JDK8, they fixed the binary compatibility issue w/ default methods. Since CDI 2.0 should be targeting a Java 8 runtime, can we leverage that for binary compatibility, by saying any new methods we add to interfaces will be default methods some ambiguous/not very useful implementation? Yes, if we decide to target Java 8. > > John > _______________________________________________ > cdi-dev mailing list > cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev > > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the code under the Apache License, Version 2 ( http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other intellectual property rights inherent in such information.