[erlang-questions] SCTP incompatible change vote
Fri Jan 25 14:55:06 CET 2008
Kenneth Lundin wrote:
> Alternative 1 naturligtvis. Eftersom vi inte har några skarpa kunder ännu.
Excuse my English ;-) but I was thinking of another argument in favor of
#1. SCTP support has never been announced to be "production-ready". It
was included in R11B-5 in beta status, so you would be welcome to change
API reasonably without worrying too much about backward compatibility
until you remove the "beta" status.
> /mvh Kenneth
> On 1/25/08, Raimo Niskanen <> wrote:
>> Regarding the 'adaption' -> 'adaptation' spelling change
>> in the lksctp API:
>> I will change the inet driver's use of the lksctp API to
>> cope with both spellings, but what to do with the
>> gen_sctp API in Erlang? Either:
>> 1) I change all spellings of 'adaption' to 'adaptation'
>> in the Erlang API while I am at it, that is in R12B-1,
>> or in R12B-2 if I do not make the deadline. The sooner
>> such a change is made the better before too many
>> users are stuck with the old spelling.
>> 2) I keep the Erlang API until the next major release
>> (R13B) because such large changes should not happen
>> in a minor release.
>> or perhaps
>> 3) I never change the Erlang API, just to confuse
>> SCTP users and to be backwards compatible.
>> I really do not believe 3) is a serious alternative.
>> But what do you (the users) want, 1) or 2) ?
>> Or 4) (own suggestion) ?
>> / Raimo Niskanen, Erlang/OTP, Ericsson AB
More information about the erlang-questions