James Carlson wrote:
> John Fischer writes:
>>    While the API will be classified as volatile for this document,
>>    the plan is to maintain backward compatibility in future releases. 
>
> A nit, perhaps, but those two clauses are saying different things.
>
> The classification system *is* a statement of intent.  If there's an
> intent to maintain backward compatibility in future releases, then
> "Volatile" doesn't express that intent.
>
> I hope this isn't being classed as "Volatile" merely because it's
> written by a third party.
NVIDIA plans to main full backward compatibility, so it is a statement
of their intent.  However, this will become an open source project hosted
by X.Org.


Reply via email to