On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 4:42 PM, David G. Mackay <mackay_d@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 17:20 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 11:03:07AM -0500, David G. Mackay wrote: >> > >> > On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 08:39 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: >> > > Unanswered: >> > > > Is there similar outrage against upstreams as well? Where is > it? >> > >> > On this list, it's shouted down. I commented some time ago about > the >> > rather toxic behavior of the python developers vis-a-vis breaking >> > compatibility at virtually every release. You would have thought > that I >> > had urinated in the holy water. >> > >> > It's an ugly little wart on the free software movement. There's > nowhere >> > near the incentive to take care of your user base without a direct >> > financial gain. Not, mind you, that commercial ventures haven't > done >> > the same, but the consequences to them are more severe and direct. >> >> You don't get to dictate what the upstream project's priorities are. > > Dictate, no, criticize, yes. > >> If you don't like the fact that apps break with every new python >> release (I don't like it either), then pick a different programming >> language with an upstream whose priorities better align with your >> needs. eg, Perl or Java or OCaml or any number of other languages. > > Well, for me, it means that I will use python for smaller projects, and > probably java for large/persistent projects. However, there are ripple > effects in that people that have developed tools that I want to use in > python, i. e. zope, are also placed in an untenable position. >From what I understand, Python is designed to be parallel installable. Just a tidbit of info I had come across. -- Fedora 9 : sulphur is good for the skin ( www.pembo13.com ) -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
