Hi, can anyone who did changes to the SPI verify that they are backwards compatible? This means only additions to the SPI are ok. If you remove, rename or modify existing signatures you need to deprecate for the next release and clearly communicate it so that we can do an according release number in a subsequent release. Thanks, Heiko _______________________________________________ jbossws-dev mailing list jbossws-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossws-dev

Can you verify if container or stack integration code depends on this signature? If it's just the stack integration, then we can argue about it. But I think that this general rule should apply to any changes. /Heiko On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 17:01 +0100, Richard Opalka wrote: > Hi Heiko, > > I did one incompatible change to the SPI, but Thomas told me that it > is OK, because only we are consumers of our SPI. > If it isn't OK, let me know and I'll return removed method and deprecate it. > > See: http://fisheye.jboss.com/changelog/JBossWS/spi/trunk?cs=5245 > > Richard > > Heiko Braun wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> can anyone who did changes to the SPI verify that they >> are backwards compatible? This means only additions to the SPI >> are ok. If you remove, rename or modify existing signatures you need to >> deprecate for the next release and clearly communicate it so that we can >> do an according release number in a subsequent release. >> >> >> Thanks, Heiko >> >> _______________________________________________ >> jbossws-dev mailing list >> jbossws-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossws-dev >> >> >