[Gtk-sharp-list] API Freeze Policy Adjustment

[Murray Cumming]

On Thu, 2004-07-01 at 16:41 -0400, Miguel de Icaza wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> > > > The API rules and the whole release process are not meant to make life
> > > > difficult for you, or to get in your way. But large API changes have no
> > > > place in a stable release. The GNOME developers seem quite united in
> > > > their approval of this policy.
> > > 
> > > While I was the maintainer of libgnome, my policy was to keep backwards
> > > compatibility, but new APIs could be introduced (since they would not
> > > break old software).
> > > 
> > > The Gtk+ maintainers have a different position.
> > > 
> > > But I would not characterize "The GNOME developers" being "quite
> > > united", we disagreed in the past, and we seem to disagree now.
> > 
> > As far as I can tell, all current maintainers of GNOME Platform
> > libraries are very clear about this. The release process is now very
> > established and they don't just ignore the freezes.
> 
> Except for yourself, according to your message indicating you've broken
> the policy.

I am on the release-team, so I kind of self-approve my freeze breaks.
It's not good though. I was trying to demonstrate that minor breaks
changes are allowed - the release process is not meant to make life
difficult. There is an established freeze-break approval process, and
current GNOME Platform maintainers are fully aware of it. 

> Anyways, we have different dynamics in the Mono world, its just a nice
> result of being able to move swiftly with the most fantastic development
> platform on earth ;-)

I don't think Mono changes concepts of API stability. You are not
special.

I think if you want to be a development platform then you have to act
like a development platform. It's incredibly arrogant of you to think
that you don't need to fit in with the rest of the GNOME platform even
one little bit.

-- 
Murray Cumming
murrayc@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com