[Dbix-class] IMPORTANT: A discussion of DBIC governance and future development

[Colin Newell]

On 5 October 2016 at 09:07, David Golden <xdg at xdg.me> wrote:
> * DBIx::Class2 (DBIC2) – new feature development, with lower stability
> expectations
>

The idea of a new project with lower stability expectations worries
me.  The idea of backwards compatibility and stability have been a
major part of our continued use of the library.  Code I wrote >5 years
ago still works unchanged with no problem, and I would be loath to
lose that.

That's not to say that I have anything against the DBIC2 idea.  I just
want to be clear on what kind of stability/compatibility expectations
we would have.  I'm know David doesn't mean that it would become a hot
mess, but I'd rather not chip away at the stability expectations.

It's not like DBIC never introduced bugs with new versions, they were
simply fixed fairly quickly when they occurred.  Having a freeze and
then a split sounds okay, except that I normally associate that with a
different direction, which isn't something I'd greatly like to see.
If it's purely for non technical reasons then fair enough.


Colin.