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

> 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