Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from December 2017
> On Dec 29, 2017, at 17:32, John Alvord <johngrahamalvord@gmail.com> wrote: > > Seems like an experimental feature that has been allowed to remain for many years becomes a defacto feature... sort of like a British public footpath. So remove the experimental designation and reduce confusion/friction. Grandfathering in experimental features isn't a design process. It should not be done on the metaphorical eve of having a process. I propose that the "experimental" flag be deprecated. It doesn't work. People YOLO experimental features into CPAN and production DarkPAN anyway. Rescinding experimental features becomes problematic. Perl development stalls because progress would break a lot of ill-advised code. This bolsters the public expectation that "experimental" features are safe to use. I propose that the "experimental" flag be enforced regardless what breaks. Expectations have been managed poorly. One solution is to take a hard line on experimental features. If the public knows the Porters mean business, they'll stop YOLOing so much, and the flag might work as originally intended. -- Rocco Caputo <rcaputo@pobox.com>Thread Previous | Thread Next