yes compatibility or compatible is a good name.
On Aug 24, 2009, at 8:20 AM, Hong Zhang wrote:
> Have we decided on the flag name for this? As the purpose of the
> flag in this case is mainly maintaining backward compatibility with
> prior releases, I think it makes sense to use a more generic flag
> like "compatibility" as Sahoo suggested so we can use the same flag
> for other compatibility related things...
>
>
>> Finally, on a second thought, I think we can rename the deploy
>> option from "jarVisibility" to something like "compatibility" so
>> that we can use the same flag any other compatibility issues. Then,
>> we don't need yet another option when move to next version. We can
>> just have --compatibility=v3 while running in v3++.
>
>
>
> Jerome Dochez wrote:
>
>>
>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>