[cdi-dev] Binary compatibility and removing classes

[John D. Ament]

BTW, my point on binary compatibility is moot.  As long as we don't require
app developers to implement interfaces, we can add methods all over.  The
impls can fix that themselves.

On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Pete Muir <pmuir at redhat.com> wrote:

>
> On 19 Sep 2014, at 02:31, John D. Ament <john.d.ament at gmail.com> 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 at 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.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20140924/1a5c257c/attachment.html