Jonas Hahnfeld <hah...@hahnjo.de> writes: > Am Samstag, den 14.03.2020, 10:50 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup: >> Jonas Hahnfeld < >> hah...@hahnjo.de >> > writes: >> >> > Am Freitag, den 13.03.2020, 23:09 -0600 schrieb Anthony Fok: >> > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 2:02 AM Jonas Hahnfeld < >> > > hah...@hahnjo.de >> > > >> > > > wrote: >> > > > I'm still not convinced that we need compatibility code, but I'm happy >> > > > with anything that gets us to a release and is not technically wrong. >> > > >> > > By the way, from a Debian package maintainer point of view, breaking >> > > backward compatibility is OK as long as it is documented, so if >> > > breaking backward compatibility makes the code cleaner, more correct, >> > > and/or easier to maintain for the future, I'd say "please break >> > > compatibility"! >> > >> > I definitely think that's the case here. >> >> Backward compatibility will always get retired eventually. For the >> current decision the main target is not really distributions since those >> tend not to package unstable versions anyway. > > Exactly my argument in the past. So who is the "main target" in your > opinion? I mostly remember the term "system integrators".
Is there a reason we should not be catering well to either? -- David Kastrup
