[Xastir-dev] How many years should we go back? (library compatibility)

[Gerry Creager - NOAA Affiliate]

5 years is not a bad range from a software support perspective but begins
to sound like OS long-term support. Some of the code I work with claims to
support back 3 or 4 major releases... unless they add something that isn't
backward compatible. I think 5 years is a decent middle-ground.

gerry

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 9:42 AM, Curt, WE7U <curt.we7u at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 16 Feb 2018, Tom Russo wrote:
>
> My proposal is that we shoot for 5 years back. If a library has deprecated
>>> a function and a new one replaced it 5 or more years ago, we should be good
>>> to replace that section of code with the new function w/o maintaining
>>> backwards compatibility with the earlier function call.
>>>
>>> Any takers on 5 years? Different suggestions?
>>>
>>
>> 5 years seems reasonable to me.  Some distros are *extremely* conservative
>> and may have long term support versions (staring angrily at RHEL, frex).
>>
>
> Any dissenting opinions out there?
>
>
> The code I was thinking of whacking is actually there to support old
>> versions
>> of Magick from over 15 years ago.  I think it should be very safe to clean
>> it out.
>>
>
> Agreed.
>
> --
> Curt, WE7U.        http://we7u.wetnet.net
>   "Lotto:  A tax on people who are bad at math." - unknown
> "Windows:  Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates." - WE7U.
> Coordinate Converter (Android): http://www.sarguydigital.com
> _______________________________________________
> Xastir-dev mailing list
> Xastir-dev at lists.xastir.org
> http://xastir.org/mailman/listinfo/xastir-dev
>



-- 
Gerry Creager
NSSL/CIMMS
405.325.6371
++++++++++++++++++++++
“Big whorls have little whorls,
That feed on their velocity;
And little whorls have lesser whorls,
And so on to viscosity.”
Lewis Fry Richardson (1881-1953)