On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2012-11-08 1:44 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote: >> If we consider a partial feature ready for use by Web developers, then >> we could ship the partial feature on the release channel without >> prefix. > > Hmm, well, a partial feature might be considered useful for web developers, > but still finishing the implementation may mean changing the way that the > partial implementation works later on, which is likely to break stuff that > rely on it. I'm not sure how you'd reconcile the two sides here.
Do you have a concrete example from the past where all the following were true: 1) Letting Web authors use a partial feature was considered useful. 2) The partial feature was shipped with prefix. 3) Had the partial feature been shipped without prefix, completing the feature would have caused worse breakage then unprefixing the feature. Or do you have a concrete example from the past where all the following were true: 1) Letting Web authors use a partial feature was considered useful. 2) The partial feature was shipped without prefix. 3) Completing the feature caused breakage that was worse than the breakage that would have been caused by shipping the partial feature with prefix and unprefixing the feature after completion. ? -- Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/ _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
