|
From: Brendan G. <bre...@gm...> - 2006-07-21 16:01:29
|
I agree. This has caught all of us out at my current job at one point or another. On 7/21/06, Darren Davison <da...@da...> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 10:51:55PM -0400, Colin Sampaleanu wrote: > > historical thing... I picked this up a long long time ago, probably a > > bit past Spring 1.0, but at that time it was decided that it would not > > be changed in order to not break backwards compatibility, but it's an > > unfortunate wart, as people get surprised by it all the time. The one > > so would the impending 2.0 release be a good time to change this to the > behaviour that most would expect? Of course it won't be backwards > compatible, but I think those tradeoffs have already been discussed and if > you can't do stuff like this on a major version release, Spring will end > up > carrying this baggage around for ever. > > IMO, you can expect some non-BC in a major version change and so long as > they are prominently documented, it's not so bad. > > What does anyone else think? > > Regards, > > -- > Darren Davison > Public Key: 0xDD356B0D > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT > Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share > your > opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV > > _______________________________________________ > Springframework-developer mailing list > Spr...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer > > > > |