Re: Minor Groovy Refactoring

From: Jason Lee <>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 09:05:32 -0600

On 1/5/10 9:01 PM, Ed Burns wrote:
> JD> Well, we try not to change publicly facing APIs - any chance of
> having
> JD> the old filter class still there as a proxy to the new one, so existing
> JD> apps continue to work? I'd prefer not to break existing apps with a dot
> JD> dot release, even if the fix is a single line of configuration.
> JD> Otherwise, no objection.
> Thanks for doing this. This is very important work, Jason. I agree
> with Jim that I'd like to have just the old filter there.
That's a fair point. How about this:

* I move all of the code as I've done.
* I created a proxy in the old location that points to the new one as
Jim suggested. What I might do is, in the old location, just extend the
"new" one, possibly marking this class with @Deprecated and logging a
* At some point in the future remove the "proxy" to finish the clean up.

Does that sound OK?

Jason Lee, SCJP
President, Oklahoma City Java Users Group
Senior Java Developer, Sun Microsystems