On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 06:40:39 +0000, Chris Morley wrote: >> >> The logic is a bit tricky, but I think it can be done. I assume the >> UI's wont all be upgraded in one go, and linuxcnc.in gets upgraded >> first, then the UI's in a piecemeal fashion. >> > > Considering the possibility of linuxcnc3 actually happening - > wouldn't this approach > be better there then changing things here? > I understand the other changes to make linuxcnc load non cnc configs, > but wonder > if this change fixes something that is more 'future annoying' then > 'currently limiting' > > I guess it depends how much more development would be put in > linuxcnc2. > and of course if linuxcnc3 doesn't happen then fixing 'future > annoying' makes sense. > > I'm just stopping and asking the question no opinion formed yet.
I agree... Actually I made that assumption when I commented a little while ago backwards compatibility. For the current version it *should* remain backwards compatible unless there is an upgrade tool that fixes stuff AND people willing to help when it doesn't work. For v3, I would say cut it and go fishing/coding. EBo -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
