On 2013-29-08 3:06, Andy Parker wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Henrik Lindberg
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
On 2013-28-08 21 <tel:2013-28-08%2021>:33, Andy Parker wrote:
So, short of swapping in the egrammar in as the default, I'm
actually
not seeing any change that is requiring the bump to puppet 4. It
would
be *nice* to remove deprecated functionality, and it would be really
nice to get the egrammar, but we can also continue working on
that as
the feature flag, flesh it out some more, make it faster, even
change
the semantics of parts of the puppet language to something sane,
all in
the puppet 3.x series.
Fixing the semantics of undef is hard without breaking things.
Even if we put together a new interpreter to go along with the future
parser? It seems like that, turned on as part of --parser future, would
give us all the wiggle room needed to do it in the 3.x series
Yeah, naturally, while we are in the --parser future protected switch
of the universe we can break things like that.
One more release on 3.x with more deprecations could be nice anyway
while also getting one more round of work on future parser out for
beta testing.
- henrik
So...I'll open this up. Should we continue with Puppet 3..x? Is
there a
reason that we absolutely need to break compatibility to move
forward?
No, we can continue to break things in the parallel universe first and
not decide on bumping to 4.x until it becomes difficult, costly, or
awkward to not do so.
- henrik
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet
Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
