On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 8:15 AM Jochen Wiedmann <jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In the light of the current discussions, you may be right. > > However, what I still don't understand: Why is BC such an issue for people? > > I think, it is perfectly reasonable to do, what other projects do: > > - Maintain several release branches. > - Depending on the branch, limit yourself to binary compatible changes, or > not. > - Whenever binary incompatibilities are desirable: Create a new > branch, and start to > publish releases out of that branch. > > So, what is the big deal? > > I totally agree with you, but it is as if this community has a seemingly "maintain backward compatibility at all costs" mentality which can be tremendously stifling to innovation. We should be able to maintain (and we have to for security patches) multiple release streams (2 or 3 seems reasonable). Obviously there's a balance we have to maintain, but I think we have been way too far on one side of the spectrum for far too long. People just aren't having much fun any more. For a completely volunteer-based work force, fun is important.
