In my case, Warren, I agree with you...
-- Martin G. On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 10:24:56AM -0700, Warren Young wrote: > On Mar 1, 2017, at 2:03 AM, Tony Papadimitriou <to...@acm.org> wrote: > > > > My 'prediction' is that two versions will end up in a similar mess to the > > Python 2.7 vs Python 3.x one. > > Python 3 wouldn’t run a large subset of the available Python 2 code, on > purpose. Fossil 2.x will fully use Fossil 1.x DBs. If you stick to Fossil > 2.0, you can even continue to use Fossil 1.x with that same DB. That doesn’t > sound like the Python situation to me at all. > > Python 2 wouldn’t run any Python 3-specific code, but the same is true about > Python 2.6 and Python 2.7, which you don’t seem to be worried about. Rather, > you seem to be waving the “disaster once occurred somewhere else under > entirely different circumstances” flag. (I included that latter bit because > MD5 vs SHA1 vs SHA3 is not “under entirely different circumstances.”) > > Python 2 to Python 3 was a huge jump in terms of removing old features and > such. None of that is happening here. Fossil 2 is about a *single feature*. > > Which item in the following document looks like the Fossil 1 to 2 transition > to you? > > https://docs.python.org/3/whatsnew/3.0.html > > If you want to never change, never upgrade, stick with Fossil 1. Fork it if > you like; you have that right under Fossil’s 2-clause BSD license. > > > Also, Fossil 2.0 will not be able able to get any significant updates due > > to version collision with 2.1 (so, maybe 2.0 and 3.0 -- oops, more like > > Python!) > > 2.0.1. > > > And, having to remember which version to use depending on the other side > > being compatible or not, will be a practical nuisance. > > drh has already said the new versions will warn you when you’re about to run > into a conflict. > > > Would it not be possible to have a single version that simply keeps an > > extra table with the SHA3 and the presence of the table alone will > > determine which way to go? > > Certainly. > > But every binary configuration option potentially doubles the size of the > test space. Every existing test has to run in all possible configurations. > > So, who will do that work, and why? > > I’m not asking why you want the work done, I’m asking why that person would > do it for you, if it is not you doing the work for your own benefit. What > itch is that person scratching? > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
