On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 8:24 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> Of course if your developers have not cared much for history, so that
> it's already mostly worthless, maybe it's not a big deal to ditch it.
> But I wouldn't like to work in such an environment. Most developers I
> know care about a good
On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 7:20 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 12:44 AM, Branko Čibej wrote:
>
>> I have to say I'm mildly put off by your repeated suggestions on this
>> list to throw away history to make things "easier" during migrations.
>> That "compelling need for histor
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 12:44 AM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> I have to say I'm mildly put off by your repeated suggestions on this
> list to throw away history to make things "easier" during migrations.
> That "compelling need for history" is very likely to be one of the
> reasons for using a version
This is freakin' HOT. Very nice work!
I've reviewed the reports, and it looks like we've maintained all our ABI
guarantees. The changes are what I would expect.
Thank you for this!
Cheers,
-g
On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 12:45 AM, Ponomarenko Andrey <
andrewponomare...@yandex.ru> wrote:
> Hello,
>
