Should we be so strict on maintaining backwards compatibility?

[Slavko Scekic]

And what do you think, what changes would be worth breaking the backwards
compatibility for?

On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Pedro Duque Vieira <
pedro.duquevieira at gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes, that's true. Kirill was a proponent of breaking backwards
> compatibility. I used his libraries a lot: flamingo, substance, etc and for
> each release I had to do some migration.
> My experience with Kirill's libraries tells me that breaking backwards
> compatibility is worse it. Having wrong decisions plaguing the next
> releases is far worse. It was a bit of a pain to migrate, but one worse
> enduring.
>
> I think changes should be made as quickly as possible if we wait till the
> next major release, the migration step will be worse, and the errors/wrong
> decisions will accumulate into a worse problem each release.
>
>
> Kirill asked that same question a long time ago for his Substance library
> > and it is a very valid one. Like then I would vote to maintain backwards
> > compatibility in all minor release, but allow for well considered
> breaking
> > on major releases (I have a candidate already BTW ;-). This would also
> > prevent the stacking over all releases; design decisions from Java 1.0
> are
> > still plaguing 7.0.
> > Tom
>
> --
> Pedro Duque Vieira
>