RE: [cdt-debug-dev] List of Plan items

[John Cortell <john.cortell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 12:58 PM 10/16/2006, Alain Magloire wrote:
> I do not see any difficulty
> except that it will break backward compatibility
> but since this is targeting a major release, it should not be a
> problem.

Hm. I'd like to stop for a second and discuss this point. Is it true that
we should be OK with breaking CDI compatibility in 4.0? We're working on
various features (which we will contribute for 4.0) where we go out of
the way to not break compatibility, by, e.g., introducing an
ICDIThread2. If we're looking at breaking compatibility anyway, then
there's no point in use going this messier route.

> The other thing, is that we did
> not want to bring org.eclipse.* namespace in
> to the interface so we could;

I'm with Pawel--in need of a history lesson. Why is this?

John