Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID:	<20001016130707.19138.qmail@web109.yahoomail.com>
Date:	Mon, 16 Oct 2000 06:07:07 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com>
Subject:	Re: RFC: linux compatibility
To:	cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
MIME-Version:	1.0

--- DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
> 
> > My biggest concern is backwards compatibility.
> > Is it worth Linux compatibility if it means "cygwin2.dll"?
> 
> The timezone API is the biggest problem here, and the most visible.
> Changing that might break compatibility all by itself.  I haven't
> checked into the whole story enough to know for sure.  I agree
> backward compatibility is an important goal.
> 

Backward compatibility is important but not to the exclusion of improvement and
progress.  If backward compatibility becomes difficult to impossible to achieve
in light of improvement and progress then yes it's time for a major version
increment.

Now what can be done in order to allow for a mix of major versions?  Or is this
just totally impossible?

Cheers,

=====
Earnie Boyd
mailto:earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com

---         <http://earniesystems.safeshopper.com>         ---
--- Cygwin: POSIX on Windows <http://gw32.freeyellow.com/> ---
---   Minimalist GNU for Windows <http://www.mingw.org/>   ---

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf!  It's FREE.
http://im.yahoo.com/

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com

- Raw text -