jdnc-interest@... wrote:
> @Lucio, thanks for the pointer - hadn't checked the obvious, blind to the trees :-)
>
> @Fabrizio, looks like I don't have to checkout BBB because there is none as well ;-) Can wait, no problem - just thought to need it in the cleanup of swinglabs-demos, but nothing immediate. While I have your ear: how "far-away" in code compatibility is BBB from the last beansbinding? Migrated the appframework to bsaf a couple of weeks ago, painlessly (never used the latest from appframework trunk anyway, as that would have been a pain), probably should do so for binding as well.
>
One of the aims of BBB is to keep binary compatibility. So far, it keeps
it (I've not released anything recently because I'm running some tests
with my applications, and so far so good). In the BBB mailing lists
there has been some debate about breaking the compatibility for some
issues (in particular, changing a few classes into interfaces). It
turned out that it wasn't necessary for that use, so at the moment there
are no problems with compatibility. Should the problem arise again,
there will be a public debate. I personally wish to keep compatibility,
but I want BBB to be community driven.
--
Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
weblogs.java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici - www.tidalwave.it/people
Fabrizio.Giudici@...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
jdnc-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail:
jdnc-help@...