Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 15 Aug 2001 10:30:11 -0700 (PDT)
From:      John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
To:        (Hellmuth Michaelis) <hm@hcs.de>
Cc:        re@FreeBSD.org, Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@starjuice.net>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/etc/defaults rc.conf
Message-ID:  <XFMail.010815103011.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20010815163557.CF51D534@hcswork.hcs.de>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On 15-Aug-01 Hellmuth Michaelis wrote:
> From the keyboard of John Baldwin:
> 
>> We aren't supposed to break -stable API's and what not.
> 
> Ok, you are right, accepted. In that strict sense you are right and the
> whole thing should be backed out.

Or the MFC should be completed.  You indicated earlier that there were some
rc.network patches that could fake up the old API, yes?

> In the last days i received numerous mails saying "oh good that it made
> it into 4.4" because noone i know is actually using the i4b in stable 
> anymore but uses the overinstall kit to use in stable what was formerly
> only in current.

Well, if no one is using the old i4b, then why did you bother to document the
fact that the user interface had changed?  Obviously there are some people
using it.  :) Is the rc.network bandaid you mentioned very hard to do?

>> The MFC should have included _all_ of the needed changes.
> 
> You are also right in this one, and in case you are taking it strict, again
> the whole thing should be backed out.

.. or the band-aid should be put in place.  The MFC isn't bad in and of itself,
it just isn't complete.

>> Backing out changes in -stable because an API or user interface is broken is
>> nonsense?  That's one of the main characteristics of -stable:  not just
>> stability as far as not crashing, but stability in APIs and user interfaces.
>> You can add new APIs, but you shouldn't break old ones.
> 
> What about giving more stability which is not possible without breaking an
> API ?

You can stabilize and extend an API w/o destroying backwards compatibility for
a well-established branch.  At least you've already hinted that rc.network
could be patched to do this.  Why not fix rc.network?  That would certainly be
preferable to backing out lots of changes.  When MFC'ing things, we should
attempt to not break existing interfaces if we can help it.

-- 

John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve!"  -  http://www.FreeBSD.org/

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.010815103011.jhb>