Re: [infinispan-dev] Separating FluentTypes into a separate file?

Thx guys. I'll get it sorted for CR1 at the latest: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-1452 On Oct 12, 2011, at 6:27 PM, Dan Berindei wrote: >> On 12 October 2011 17:14, Dan Berindei <dan.berindei(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>> Making a non-public type public preserves binary compatibility, >>> according to http://wiki.eclipse.org/Evolving_Java-based_APIs_2#Achieving_API_Binary_C... >> >> I don't think that's related with Galder's question is it? Why do we >> need binary compatibility? I think he's referring to APIs. Anyway the >> classname is changing as well as it was a nested class so I don't >> think it's preserving binary compatibility. >> > > The FluentTypes interface is already top-level, it's just defined in > FluentConfiguration.java so it can't be public. > So making it public won't break compatibility, it won't even require > the recompilation of client classes. > > Cheers > Dan > _______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev -- Galder Zamarreño Sr. Software Engineer Infinispan, JBoss Cache _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev