Serviceable, Was: Component deprecation warnings (Re: What is a Parser?)

[Vadim Gritsenko <va...@verizon.net>]

Jeff Turner wrote:
...

>Clearly there are advantages of Serviceable, but they seem totally
>independent of whether Component has a @deprecated tag or not.  When I
>boot my Win95 box, I don't get a popup warning me that it's obsolete.
>  
>

:)


>IMO:
>
> - cocoon-dev should call for volunteers to Serviceable'ize the codebase.
>   If none come forward before beta, use a recompiled Framework without
>   the @deprecated
>  
>

Given the fact that we have to provide full backward compatibility in 
2.x series, which means that all Components and Composables must be 
honored, what is the reason moving to Serviceable except to confuse 
people even more?

Please take into account that interfaces like Generator, Transformer, 
Serializer all extend Component and this can not be changed.

My thinking is that this makes sense for 3.0. Then you can change base 
Cocoon interfaces, remove Component everywhere, remove support for 
Composable, etc. OTOH, timing for such changes is really not good - we 
just have 3 books published recently. I think there are better issues to 
be resolved before spending energy on this.

Vadim


> - avalon-dev should consider if the stick (@deprecated) is really
>   necessary, if the carrot (eliminating the Component interface) is so
>   compelling.
>
>
>--Jeff
>
>  
>
>>Cheers, Steve.
>>    
>>



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org