Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from December 2017
Rocco Caputo wrote: > On Dec 30, 2017, at 20:48, Father Chrysostomos <sprout cpan.org> wrote: > > This would be a good way to discourage people from implementing > > new features. > > I'm okay with that as an alternative to half-baked things remaining > incomplete indefinitely. Yes, but what benefit would such a policy provide? Give a practical example. Policies to prevent unreasonable situations that do not hap- pen anyway are needless cruft. Crafting policies to handle the unique case of smartmatch is not going to work. It is a unique case. We will just be left with policies for policies' sake. > If the Porters want Perl to be defined by popular usage, it behooves > them not to release experiments they aren't prepared to support. My point was that responding to user complaints or CPAN breakage by reverting unpopular changes, especially if it does not seem that an alternative will be ready in time for the next stable release, is just common courtesy. You do not need a policy to be courteous. You could call that 'support'.Thread Previous | Thread Next