25 Jan
2008
25 Jan
'08
8:07 a.m.
On Thursday 24 January 2008 12:25:15 Krzysztof Foltman wrote:
Bob Ham wrote:
I volunteer for updating existing programs once a new and improved LASH API is
out the door! :)
I do also feel that the API could be much better. But at the same time I don't
think we should start by rewriting it. One step at a time...
Juuso
I think it's important *to* break the current
API due to its many
issues. Why do you think that backwards compatibility with the current
API is important?
LASH adoption was slow enough to start with. Several projects exist that
use current LASH, some are quite useful (Hydrogen, Specimen), do you
want to personally update each and every of those (including the
abandoned ones) and make the updates into each distribution? It just
won't work. Be realistic.