[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [eclipse-dev] Best practices for provisional APIs
|
I agree with Mike. "provisional api" or "internal
provisional", whatever you call it, is just a guess anyway because you
reserve the right to change it.
I find the notion of provisional
api to be basically just an oximoron. We should have only two categories: API,
and things that are internal because they haven't yet stabilized/been
validated enough to be API.
McQ.
Pascal
Rapicault/Ottawa/IBM@IBMCA
Sent by: eclipse-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
02/17/06 08:44
|
Please respond
to
"General development mailing list of the Eclipse
project." |
|
|
To
| eclipse-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
|
|
cc
|
|
|
Subject
| [eclipse-dev] Best
practices for provisional APIs |
|
Hi,
Should we adopt a consistent way to indicate
provisional APIs across the SDK?
More specifically I'm wondering what are the rules
for
- the package
name. should the API be in the package where it would belong if it was real
API, or should it be in an internal package?
- the javadoc markup. should the javadoc say:
experimental, provisional, something else?
Aside from those questions, I
propose to add to the javadoc an explicit request for feedback from the users
and explaining where this feedback should be given (a mailing-list, a bug
report, ...)
PaScaL_______________________________________________
eclipse-dev
mailing list
eclipse-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options,
retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list,
visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-dev
