Hi,

On Sat, 17 May 2008, Sverre Rabbelier wrote:

quoted text
> On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 4:44 PM, Steven Walter <stevenrwalter@gmail.com> 
> wrote:
>
> > With this dedication to backwards-compatibility, we'll be at Windows 
> > Vista quality in no time.

That is silly at best, especially given that Vista is _not_ 
backwards-compatible.  Not to mention that it is not forkable, because it 
is not Open Source.

quoted text
> I very much agree here, given the nature of scripts (that is, being very 
> easy to update), I think we should try not to be too strict in 
> backwards-compatibility or we'll lose the flexibility that is very much 
> needed when developing a Good Product (tm) As long as such compatibility 
> breaking changes are marked (in BIG LETTERS) in the changelog/release 
> notes I think that would be a 'sacrifice' we should consider making.

Had you (one of our GSoc students) not replied, I would not even have 
bothered to say anything.

But I strongly disagree with the notion that it is okay to fsck with 
old-timers (who would be harmed by breaking backwards-incompatibility, 
and nobody else), especially given that it is mostly old-timers who turned 
Git into the Good Product(tm) it is.

Ciao,
Dscho

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html