On Tue, 2015-10-27 at 21:47 +0100, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 25. Oktober 2015, 15:13:06 schrieb Matthew Toseland:
> > I disagree. We should take reasonable steps to avoid breaking
> > unofficial
> > plugins, but we shouldn't let it cripple us. We are not Microsoft.
> > And
> > db4o is unmaintained upstream...
> 
> Let’s avoid doing another “hey, we’re growing again, how about
> breaking people’s setup?” ← we already did that a few times. It was
> pretty frustrating.
> 
> There’s no gain from removing db4o except for ideological pureness,
> which has no value for our users.
> 

More software -> more maintenance burden -> more bugs -> less time
spent on fixing things users actually use.

What's the part you don't understand?

Right now, keeping db4o means headaches with packaging and build-system 
integration. It's one of the few dependencies we have that uses
Maven...

Nobody is happy with it; the ideology purists, the packagers nor the
people who actually use it (xor's plugins). They all want change
(removal or upgrade depending on who you ask); unless you volunteer to
handle the actual changes, I'm not sure I understand why you'd get a
vote on what will happen.

Florent

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to