On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Dan Jenkins <dan.jenkin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> I'd go with Option 1 - although it feels wrong breaking something > (regardless as to whether it was already broken) within a minor/patch > release. > > In theory people should be reading release notes but I fall foul of not > reading release notes for breakages within a minor/patch update - because > in theory it shouldn't break anything... But we all know this does indeed > happen. I would argue the current behaviour is broken and so you are fixing > the broken behaviour - if people are relying on the data in this command > then they're relying on incorrect data anyway. > I like your reasoning. > > -- > _____________________________________________________________________ > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- > > asterisk-dev mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev > -- George Joseph Digium, Inc. | Software Developer 445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - US Check us out at: www.digium.com & www.asterisk.org
-- _____________________________________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
