On 6/16/2016 6:30 PM, Rowan Collins wrote: > On 16/06/2016 17:24, Levi Morrison wrote: >>> I also have to say that to the very short timeline to finalize 7.0 >>> should not be paid by breaking BCs in 7.x. We can have a short >>> timeline for 8.0 as well. If we need more drastic BC breaks earlier >>> than expected. If JIT is a goal for 8.0, then let do the BC breaks in >>> 8.0 and prepare our users using 7.x. >> >> I agree with sentiment. However I do not mind certain BC breaks being >> made in 7.1. For 7.2 and beyond I think we should be significantly >> more strict on BC breakages. > > Why? What's special about 7.1? If it was a case of finishing off changes > that "should have been part of 7.0", I can see some kind of logic, but > the ones we're actually discussing seem to be more about "preparing for > 8.0". > > Regards,
I agree fully with Rowan. Squeezing in those features that did not make it into 7.0 is plain wrong and only creates problems. Everyone is always so concerned about breaking something if someone proposes some deprecation but in such cases nobody cares. This is a very bad attitude! -- Richard "Fleshgrinder" Fussenegger
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
