Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 10:16:24 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@starjuice.net> To: Peter Jeremy <peter.jeremy@alcatel.com.au> Cc: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>, Alfred Perlstein <alfred@FreeBSD.ORG>, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/stdio findfp.c Message-ID: <20021101081624.GA38967@starjuice.net> In-Reply-To: <20021031213557.GG6446@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> References: <20021031095115.GW24139@elvis.mu.org> <20021031220322.Y9371-100000@gamplex.bde.org> <20021031213557.GG6446@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On (2002/11/01 08:35), Peter Jeremy wrote: > Overall, I think we do fairly well. There have been three major API > breakages that I can think of: a.out -> ELF, the sigset_t changes > and these __sF changes. I think what often makes things worse is that the email threads that lead up to API break decisions are often very long and contain many tangents, so people stop reading. Then when the change is made, a lot of folks don't know why it was made. They only understand the breakage, not the gain. Maybe if the HEADS UP message that goes out about a new API break includes information about what the change scores us, people will be less inclined to whine. Then again, maybe there are some people who will simply always be whining. :-) Ciao, Sheldon. 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?20021101081624.GA38967>