Re: DeltaV conformance vs backward compatibility in fixing the issue 2151

> That's why the client should be fixed first, so that the server can be
> fixed (in a fully compliant way) when all supported client versions are
> known to work.

In that way, server can not be fixed before 1.3.0 becomes unsupported.
Then issue 2151 will be left for, I think, at least 6 months. With my
proposal, issue 2151 can be fixed in 1.4.0. It also can be fixed in
1.3.1 with some luck. I strongly prefer the performance fix comes first.

>> Am I missing something?
>
> Yes. If you don't fix the client, you can't make the server fully
> compliant at a later point of time (right?).

That's right. But issue 2151 is a performance issue, not a compliance
issue. Making the server fully compliant is no required here. I know
the fixed server won't be a fully compliant DeltaV server, but that is
not a regression. Does my proposal prevent the compliance issue?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Feb 20 20:06:38 2006