Re: GH. Again.

[Marius Vollmer]

Neil Jerram <address@hidden> writes:

> >>>>> "Marius" == Marius Vollmer <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>     Marius> Neil Jerram <address@hidden> writes:
>     >> >>>>> "Marius" == Marius Vollmer <address@hidden> writes:
>     >> 
>     >> >> - remove anything that's been added to GH since 1.4, and
>     >> don't >> add anything else to it.
>     >> 
>     Marius> Why should we remove stuff?
>     >>  For users who only follow the official Guile releases, it
>     >> would look strange simultaneously to announce that GH is
>     >> deprecated, and to announce that the GH interface has been
>     >> extended!
> 
>     Marius> Couldn't we just be silent (or low voiced) about the
>     Marius> changes to GH?  It doesn't feel right to me to turn back
>     Marius> the clock for GH, causing work for us and the people who
>     Marius> are using the removed features.
> 
> We could, but I think my detailed reasons against doing so still
> stand.  (Remember that, from the point of view of people that follow
> only releases, the clock is not being turned back.)

Hmm, there might be a misunderstanding here: whether or not to make
the 1.6.0 GH interface compatible with 1.4; opposed to whether or not
making 1.6.0 GH identical to 1.4.  I assumed you mean the latter while
you probably only meant the former, right?

I do think we should make 1.6.0 GH compatible to 1.4, but I am wary
about making it identical.

> However, it's probably not a big deal either way - has a lot been
> added to GH since 1.4?

I don't think so.  Mere additions are OK, I'd say, and the rest should
be mostly bug fixes, which are also OK.  Genuine changes that lead to
incompatabilities should be rare.