[zeromq-dev] multi-part messages
ph at imatix.com
Wed Jan 25 16:03:57 CET 2012
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Martin Lucina <martin at lucina.net> wrote:
> I don't think Martin is ignoring anyone intentionally, just trying to
> get the best result with the least possible resources.
I don't think you're saying the rest of us have the goal of getting
worse results, or spending more time than we need to.
Introducing new features without breaking old ones is not wasteful,
but making large branches no--one uses is.
You're quite right to remind us that identities are complex and agreed
to be removed (and already partially gone) but that's a different
issue. We have a clear cost/benefit that can be discussed and decided.
Same with devices, swap, etc. The cost/benefit for changes like labels
aren't known upfront, which isn't helped by a "here's a bunch of new
code, take it or leave it" style. Thus, if you have any hope of
getting such changes accepted one MUST be compatible and give people
time to weigh the economics.
This is how every sane project does it (e.g. how Linux system calls
migrate towards POSIX). It is more economical than attempting to make
incompatible change on the basis of "trust me, it's worth it", and
then having to abandon that.
More information about the zeromq-dev