From: Leo S. <leo...@df...> - 2008-04-29 16:50:55
|
Ho, It was Antoni Mylka who said at the right time 28.04.2008 22:48 the following words: > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 8:55 AM, Christiaan Fluit > <chr...@ad...> wrote: > >> Leo Sauermann wrote: >> > Chris, your argumentation of "implementors will surely provide their own >> > implementation and then will work with simple interfaces of crawler and >> > accessdata" falls insofar apart, as >> > * people are lazy and expect it to work out of the box >> > * people will get good information about how to optimize it if the >> > information is encoded within the AccessData interface. >> >> ok >> >> >> > => the new interface methods also sum up this discussion we have here at >> > the moment, this is needed documentation, otherwise our decisions will >> > remain to rot in a mailinglist... :-) >> > >> > About changing the interfaces: >> > according to our numbering policy [1], we may have to increase the >> > major/minor version number now: >> > " Minor versions should always have complete API back-compatiblity. >> > That's to say, any code developed against *X.0* should continue to run >> > without alteration against all *X.N* releases. >> > A major release may introduce incompatible API changes. The transition >> > strategy is to introduce new APIs in release *X.N*, deprecating old >> > APIs, then remove all deprecated APIs in release *X+1.0*." >> > >> > Hence, its Aperture 1.1.0 release. >> >> Actually, I would think this implies a 2.0 release! I.e. the format is >> "major.minor.bugfix". That is also how it works in the Lucene community, >> which we've taken as an example. >> >> That's another reason why I wasn't thrilled about doing an AccessData >> API change now. >> >> > > That's important. IMHO we can't release SubCrawlers without those > changes in the AccessData that enable them to work reliably. If we > want to conform to the Apache version numbering policy then the choice > is either to release Aperture 2.0 or to drop SubCrawlers, > CrawlerBase.runSubCrawler and the AccessData from the next release and > wait for Aperture 2.0 to do them. > The key is: "any code developed against *X.0* should continue to run > without alteration against all *X.N* releases" AGAINST meaning - users of our library. Internally, it is ok to change stuff. And the changes to accessdata are internally - common users don't care about this. The question is - do crawlerhandlers that are developed against the current version also work with the subcrawlers? Did the interface of Crawlerhandler chnage? It would look dumb to release 2.0 a few months after 1.0, or? but I am also ok with 2.0 best Leo -- ____________________________________________________ DI Leo Sauermann http://www.dfki.de/~sauermann Deutsches Forschungszentrum fuer Kuenstliche Intelligenz DFKI GmbH Trippstadter Strasse 122 P.O. Box 2080 Fon: +49 631 20575-116 D-67663 Kaiserslautern Fax: +49 631 20575-102 Germany Mail: leo...@df... Geschaeftsfuehrung: Prof.Dr.Dr.h.c.mult. Wolfgang Wahlster (Vorsitzender) Dr. Walter Olthoff Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes Amtsgericht Kaiserslautern, HRB 2313 ____________________________________________________ |