cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Lundquist>
Subject Re: 2.1.8 (Was: Re: JING Transformer...)
Date Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:59:20 GMT

On Aug 31, 2005, at 9:27 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:

> My opinion is that a community that releases software that it won't 
> stand behind has a significant problem.

"Won't stand behind" seems like too strong/loaded of a characterization 
for this CForms thing.  Support for CForms has been great.

Here's what I think "stable" means, can somebody please confirm/correct 

"X is stable" entails that:

(1) Support for X will not be unduly removed, i.e. without going 
through the deprecation cycle.  "Support" entails that product releases 
will include X, and that the product will not be released with changes 
that are known to break X.

(2) All future changes to X's APIs will be backward-compatible.

Your position is that CForms is "good enough", and we should just mark 
it as "stable" and have done with it.  Because for you, any "good 
enough" CForms is better than no CForms, which is what you get as long 
as it's still "unstable", thanks to your employer's bull-headed, 
inflexible policy.

But for my part... I do not want to be stuck with a "better than none" 
CForms forever.  I want CForms to be right eventually, and I don't want 
anything closing the door to that.  There are still things that need to 
be done to get it there.  And until then, I get to use an "almost 
right" CForms, because I don't have anybody telling me what I can and 
can't use.

I certainly do not think that saying "we still have more work to do 
before we promise that there will never be a backwards-incompatible API 
change" constitutes "not standing behind" our product.  Quite the 
contrary, I think it represents a greater commitment than just "close 
the lid and flush" :-/


View raw message