On Wednesday 04 November 2009 23:50:26 Ian Clarke wrote: > On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Zero3 <zero3 at zerosplayground.dk> wrote: > > Ian Clarke wrote: > >> That being said, I think the key question is still: what do we gain by > >> dropping 1.5 compatibility? > > > > IMHO, for what it's worth: I'm not qualified to tell exactly what kind > > of new stuff 1.6 introduced, but I don't think we should fall behind > > upstream. If 1.5 is now end-of-life, we should already have moved to > > 1.6, which has been out since late 2006. I don't think supporting a > > minority of users with hopelessly outdated systems justifies holding > > back development. > > It doesn't, however: > > 1) We're not necessarily talking about hopelessly outdated systems, > but macs that are using the latest but one version of the operating > system (which was current until just a few months ago). > > 2) Its far from clear that development is being held back in any way > by maintaining 1.5 compatibility. > > There really aren't very many improvements between 1.5 and 1.6 > (unlike, for example, 1.4 and 1.5 which had major language changes > like generics).
Agreed, there are a *lot* of Mac users who would be hit badly. There are minor language features in 1.6, and the free space API, which we currently call through reflection. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 835 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20091105/31cec104/attachment.pgp>
