On Tue, 5 Aug 2008, Jeff Johnson wrote:
On Aug 5, 2008, at 6:06 PM, Dag Wieers wrote:
On Tue, 5 Aug 2008, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
It doesn't matter who does it or where - making something that is not inherently backwards compatible is bound to cause pain.
As does making something which has to be backwards compatible all the time.
Exactly, both comments conjured a smile on my face :)
While I'm happy to see a smile on yer face, and backward compatibility is incredibly important (you are one of the few who understands that importance),
*BUT*
I'm forced to point out that the engineering changes that led to the creation of perl-devel packaging are quite sound. The perl package always was a messy mixture of modules and other "stuff", pretending otherwise is foolish.
One needs to balance fixes against compatibility on a case by case basis. No one rule, or one policy, can be generally applied.
You are misreading the smile !
But I feel no urge to explain, maybe it will come up next year in a pub in Brussels ;-)