Björn Persson wrote:
> IDNA2008 isn't fully compatible with IDNA2003, and therefore the switch
> should be done only after application authors have assessed the impact
> on their particular application. Parallel-installable libraries allow
> them to do this and switch over one application at a time. What you're
> proposing would enforce the change, causing applications to suddenly map
> some domains differently before upstream authors are prepared, as if
> LibIDN2 had been released as simply a new version of LibIDN.
Yet this is exactly what the proposed Fedora feature to patch all
applications amounts to, too. Just with a lot more work for us packagers.
> I know it's very popular to break functionality left and right, but
> there are some of us weirdos who actually like software that works
> consistently and reliably. The existence of LibIDN2 indicates that Simon
> Josefsson is a rare responsible programmer who wants application authors
> to be able to rely on his libraries. I ask the breakage-loving majority
> to please respect his decision, and not force their own preferences on
> his work.
So if that is the goal, we should NOT patch applications downstream to use
the new library.
Either we want everything to use libidn2 or we don't.
Kevin Kofler
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
