[jdom-interest] detach() [eg]

[Dennis Sosnoski]

Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:

> ...
> Personally, I'm of the opinion that the entire API should be up for
> grabs and subject to change with no concerns for backwards
> compatibility until we declare something 1.0. I certainly don't think
> a method that simply got checked into CVS one day is necessarily
> inviolate.

I agree that something just checked into CVS should not be binding, but I find the
rest of this disturbing. Rightly or wrongly, JDOM has been heavily promoted and is in
extensive use by many companies even in its multitude of (incompatible) beta forms.
If the intention has been to keep the API fluid it should not have been released for
public use, even as "beta" (which generally means a product is on the verge of
production release).

Adding API calls can go on forever, but backwards compatibility is already important.

  - Dennis