On Aug 21, 2009, at 2:11 PM, Roberto Chinnici wrote:
> Jerome Dochez wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:07 AM, Sahoo wrote:
>>
>>> Jerome Dochez wrote:
>>>>
>>>> if you are not deterred with option 1 then I think we should just
>>>> carry on like this. This is the safest option for our users, and
>>>> we should print a Warning so next release we remote the flag and
>>>> feature.
>>> Jerome,
>>>
>>> Did you mean option 1 or 2? Unless I am missing something, option
>>> #1 can lead to broken applications after upgrade. Is it safer than
>>> option #2?
>>>
>> yes of course, I meant using the flag.
>
> So this only applies to applications already deployed when we
> upgrade, and for all other apps, we follow EE 6 by default and if
> your app breaks you need to specify the flag?
yes.
> I'd be OK with that, I guess, but what makes you think you'll ever
> be able to remove the flag?
> That would imply that one day an app that ran on v2 (by default) and
> on v3 (with the flag) will absolutely not run unmodified on v4.
that's correct if we choose to remove the flag, but at least the
upgrade from v2 to v3 gave a warning to the user.
>
> --Roberto
>
>> thanks for catching this.
>>
>> Jerome
>>
>>> By 1 & 2, I mean the following (taken from your earlier email):
>>> /1. we don't run the upgrade redeployment with the flag and
>>> applications that were not flagged as using a deprecated or
>>> incorrect feature in V1/V2 will fail to be upgraded correctly.
>>> 2. we run with the flag which mean that we automatically upgrade
>>> and run the already deployed applications in an incompatible mode.
>>> /
>>> Thanks,
>>> Sahoo
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>