Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 22:20:22 +0100 From: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org> To: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> Cc: bakul@bitblocks.com, tlambert2@mindspring.com, will@csociety.org, kris@obsecurity.org, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Avoiding unnecessary breakage (was Re: Removing wait union) Message-ID: <20020604222022.6f935871.brian@Awfulhak.org> In-Reply-To: <p05111724b922b2b4d44b@[128.113.24.47]> References: <200206041752.NAA08182@rodney.cnchost.com> <p05111724b922b2b4d44b@[128.113.24.47]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 4 Jun 2002 14:34:34 -0400, Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> wrote:
> I hope this is not sounding too sarcastic, because I do agree
> with the general idea that we should "avoid unnecessary breakage".
> It is pretty easy to say that, but it is hard to actually do it,
> while still moving the operating system forward.
Many software vendors would say that a published interface can only be
removed after two major releases of the software. The first major
release should suggest that the interface is depricated and should no
longer be used (the documentation should probably suggest the (new?)
alternatives too). The following release can then remove the interface.
While this is painful for the developer, it's necessary for any API
provider in order to provide a *viable* platform for building upon.
Personally, I think FreeBSD should adopt such a strategy.
Whilst it would also be nice to have an Architecture group that could
control this sort of thing, I don't think that's at all practical for
FreeBSD.
--
Brian <brian@Awfulhak.org> <brian.somers@sun.com>
<http://www.Awfulhak.org>; <brian@[uk.]FreeBSD.org>
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour ! <brian@[uk.]OpenBSD.org>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020604222022.6f935871.brian>