On Friday, December 17, 2010 04:55:58 pm Les Mikesell wrote: > On 12/17/10 8:18 AM, Peter Kjellström wrote: > > Longevity (things continue to work without breakage for a long time): > > This kind of implies "don't keep stuff continously updated to recent > > > > versions" don't you think? > > It could work that way if the upstream developers of the thousands of > included projects understood the need for backwards compatibility to keep > things working. They don't. While fine in theory this wouldn't work in real life since they would have to be backwards compatible not only for their official features but also for bugs/quirks/unintended features. So even if those thousands of upstream projects managed to remain (from their perspective) perfectly backwards compatible things would still break. Not to mention the need to break backwards compatibility once in a while to move projects along (read: major versions). /Peter
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
